Solar scheme cast in shadow

A scheme that has seen solar panels approved for almost 300 farms in Counties Cavan and Monaghan in the last three years has been stymied by the Department of Agriculture as funds tighten.

A local IFA representative has slammed the reduction in availability as “farcical”.

Nationally the first three years of the Solar Capital Investment Scheme (SCIS) saw over 3,000 approvals from 5,500 farmers who applied. However, due to budget constraints, a new ‘rank and selection’ approach has been adopted where only 25% will now be approved.

Figures charting the scheme’s uptake were recently obtained by Deputy Roderic O’Gorman.

Reflecting on the figures, John Murphy, Chair of the IFA’s Environment Committee was impressed by the relative speed in which farmers embraced the scheme.

“The figures are substantial enough – it’s from a standing start,” he asserted of the situation up to the end of 2025. “The grant ceiling is generous and it has kicked off roof top solar around the country.”

The scheme though appears to be a victim of its own success.

The bill for the 1,232 farmers who have thus far been paid, has come to a reported €22.9m. This doesn’t take into account the further 1,951 farmers, who had received approval up to the end of 2025, but had still yet to be paid.

Locally, farmers in Cavan have received funding worth over €950k in total, while their Monaghan counterparts have received a total in excess of €1.5m.

“Unfortunately the money is an issue,” accepts Mr Murphy. “The biggest problem we have now is the money is running out and they’re bringing in ‘rank and select’ and they’re only going to approve one in four applications going forward. That’s a huge issue.”

The Department’s figures also show 173 applications were approved in the first three years in Monaghan; while in Cavan the number was 121. Amongst those successful applicants is new Cavan County Chair of the IFA, Owen Brodie. He began his application in late 2023 when the scheme first opened.

“The rising cost of electricity was a huge motivator,” recalls Owen. “We use substantial amounts of electricity on the dairy farm here. We wanted to save there, but also do something good for the environment, and take the pressure off the amount of electricity we use.”

Once Owen got the right company to oversee his application, the process went “fairly straightforward”; as did installation of the panels.

“Getting the right application with the TAMs was the biggest challenge,” he says, explaining they had to calculate and provide details on how much electricity is used, and how it is used.

On his Ryefield farm the milk cooler, milking machines and hot water to wash down the plant and equipment were the biggest consumers of energy.

In addition to subsidising the panels, the SCIS grant also covered a percentage of investment in battery storage.

“I went heavy on the battery storage and in hindsight I probably didn’t go heavy enough,” suggests Owen. “The battery storage enables us to make sure the electricity we buy most of the time now is night rate electricity.”

One annoyance is an anomaly Owen encountered when he applied to Revenue to claim back VAT.

“They are looking to see the amount of electricity is used by the house instead of the farm business. If I had put a solar panel in on the house there would have been no VAT on it, yet if I tell them there’s electricity going from the farm to the house they are looking to reduce the amount of VAT they give me back.”

While he believes the saving on electricity is worthwhile, it was less than he expected.

“The savings they implied once you got the grant would be four or five years’ payback, but it’s more a five or six years’ payback – which is still a good enough payback to go and do it.”

Frustration

Owen’s frustration at how the SCIS is being stymied is evident.

“I wouldn’t have done it unless I got the grant and now I’m flabbergasted that the grants are slowing down, and the amount of people still mad keen to put in solar power and yet they’re not going to be able to get the grant.

“I think there were a lot of people out there who were just getting themselves lined up to invest in it, to organise the finance for their investment and now all of a sudden it looks like it is going to be closed down and they are not going to be able to do it.”

Owen’s belief that there is a growing appetite for the scheme is borne out the number of farmers who applied nationally each year – 1,170 in 2023, rising to 1,803 in 2024 and again to 2,561 in 2025.

Asked how he would describe the limits placed on SCIS, Owen replies: “One word comes to my mind. Farcical.

“We are in a country where we need to reduce our dependence on imported fuel and every farm in the country has a shed where they could put solar panels on and greatly reduce the need for electricity to be brought on the farm, or to have some excess that they could export out of the farm – it’s a no-brainer. It’s a benefit to the environment for everybody. I just can’t see the logic of curtailing the grant on that scheme.”

Decisions

IFA Environment lead Mr Murphy appreciates that currently the grant is the difference between installing solar panels and not.

“Unless the price of solar panels and equipment and installation costs correct themselves, the sums will make it very difficult for farmers to go ahead with in the short term.”

While he concedes funding is a legitimate concern for the Department, he raises the source of the money used for the SCIS.

“Some would say that solar scheme should never have been in TAMS – it should have been in Sustainable Ireland’s grant structure, because it did rob a lot of money in the TAMs budget from other on-farm initiatives, like nutrient storage and sheds and safety issues,” he explains.

Owen meanwhile suggests the Carbon Tax should provide the finance to sustain the SCIS going forward.

“The Carbon Tax was meant to be ring-fenced for certain sectors, to encourage those sectors to become more efficient at using energy – and yet that carbon tax doesn’t seem to be used for any of this.”

Any expectation of this being funded under another mechanism?

“The honest truth is we don’t know,” says Mr Murphy. “We’re looking [for that]. If you don’t look there’s no chance of getting it. Everybody accepts at this stage it is the right thing to be doing and it does work. Sometimes these initiatives, while they might look good mightn’t work on the ground – this works. We’ll be pushing for it.”