Free solar power system. Is it a scam?

Oopsadaisy

So in summary solar is a waste of space, time, energy and money??

Oopsadaisy

Surely from a green pov the energy that goes into making the panels etc is 'additional pollution' that wouldn't have been created if they'd not bought the panels, pumps, etc??
Has anyone factored this pollution [and the carbon footprint caused by the vans, hotels, diesel, etc ued by the installers and the service people] into the equation??

XRayDave

oopsadaisy, you raise an important point when you say:

"Surely from a green pov the energy that goes into making the panels etc is 'additional pollution' that wouldn't have been created if they'd not bought the panels, pumps, etc??

Has anyone factored this pollution [and the carbon footprint caused by the vans, hotels, diesel, etc ued by the installers and the service people] into the equation??

Very few people and/or companies actually factor these hidden "costs" in. However, I suspect that over the projected lifetime of the PV installation the "pay back" in terms of lower carbon emissions more than outweighs the initial carbon cost (I stand to be corrected here).

As far as your comment about solar not being a sensible investment, it all depends on your point of view. Certainly I would not have considered Solar PV if I had had to pay the cost of the panels and the installation myself as even though I have a large, rectangular, unobstructed, South-facing roof (and hence ideal for Solar PV), the payback period would be far too long and hence uneconomic as I only intend to be in my current property for probably 10-12 years maximum (retiring to a bungalow).

However, that said, there is no prospect of energy prices falling much in the next 10 years or so and as such, the payback period may well be shorter than my projected figure of 28 years!!

Now ASG have provided FREE Solar PV panels and I for one am one VERY HAPPY BUNNY.

Interesting to see that ASG have no objection to you fitting (although I don't know how) some sort of battery storage system to the panels. I'd like more information on this please Sarah (I'll probably contact you directly).

As far as Solar Thermal goes . . .

I looked into this sometime ago and it seems that the most efficient panels are actually a combination of Solar Thermal and Solar PV - but I'm not sure if anyone in the UK sells/provides these.

Final thought, the further South you are in the UK, the more energy you are likely to produce from Solar PV and the more hot water you are likely to produce from Solar Thermal. I really don't think that Solar Thermal makes much sense in the UK (but again I stand to be corrected on this point too).

XRayDave

noncom_2

Oopsadaisy wrote: »

So in summary solar is a waste of space, time, energy and money??

Not sure how you reach that conclusion from what I said......

With regard to the first part of my post, I was merely pointing out that from a money-saving point of view, the EMMA device does not add up. In case you don't know what it is, the EMMA is a "smart" device which can measure when the panels are generating more electricity than is being consumed in the house, and instead of exporting it to the Grid it diverts it to a dedicated circuit attached to an immersion heater, effectively heating your hot water using all the "excess" electricity which you would otherwise export. It may well be a good investment for a business with a much larger solar installation than a 4kW domestic setup, if that business also has high hot water demands (eg a hotel), but for a small scale generator it is too expensive.

The use or otherwise of the EMMA does not really affect the argument as to whether Solar Panels are a good investment (taking FITs into account) since the money saved by using rather than exporting the energy is so small.

More generally, if you regard the mission to reduce fossil fuel consumption and carbon emissions as pointless, then yes, solar panels are a waste of all the things you mention. Unfortunately for your argument, most people recognise that the "cheap" option on which we have relied since the industrial revolution is unsustainable in what is now a pretty short timescale, and therefore it is essential to roll out more widespread use of technologies which are currently more expensive. Hence the Renewables Obligation for power companies, subsidies for new technologies, and schemes like the Feed In Tariffs.

Andy

noncom_2

And, in answer to your other point, I for one have chosen a local installer based only a few miles away, at least partly because it will reduce the "installation footprint".

Joined up thinking does happen, you know.

andosrowsk

Oopsadaisy wrote: »

So in summary solar is a waste of space, time, energy and money??

as somebody who works for a company specialising in knowledge of new manufacturing technologies, and having written a paper on solar photovoltaic panels only a month ago, the answer to this question is unequivocally NO.

Whilst I can't comment on whether individual schemes are a scam, the suggestion that they all are, or even a majority of them are, or even a good portion are, is way off the mark.

david cameron himself has said only today that green technology is one of the main pillars of our economic recovery. it has to be, given Britain made a pledge last year to reduce its carbon emissions by 34% by 2020, and the EU has pledged to half its carbon emissions by 2050.look at the success of feed in tariffs in Germany under their hundred thousand roofs programme, and their widespread use in other european countries like spain (although admittedly they get a bit more of the ol sunshine than us!)

given that a) oil is running out, so we now have to look in increasingly dangerous places to find it hence disasters like deepwater and b) there is just no government funding for nuclear, especially in the current climate, solar, wind and wave power are going to become a central part of our lives in the next 30 years.

so to answer your question, no solar is not the utter garbage you seem to think it is.
.

Mcfi5dhc

Oopsadaisy wrote: »

Surely from a green pov the energy that goes into making the panels etc is 'additional pollution' that wouldn't have been created if they'd not bought the panels, pumps, etc??

SarahLucyD

Oopsadaisy - I really think you've got Solar Thermal in your mind, and they're not at all related. Hence McFi's frustration! There has been some bad press about solar thermal, but I think just one firm has tarred many very legitimate ones with the same proverbial brush, unfortunately. We are NOT Solar Thermal, we provide Solar PV.

Sarah - ASG

martint123

andosrowsk wrote: »

look at the success of feed in tariffs in Germany under their hundred thousand roofs programme, and their widespread use in other european countries like spain (although admittedly they get a bit more of the ol sunshine than us!)

Though a government can renegue on a deal if it feels like it.
http://www.platts.com/RSSFeedDetailedNews.aspx?xmlpath=RSSFeed/HeadlineNews/ElectricPower/8823245.xml

SarahLucyD

Martin123 - our FIT Scheme is different - it doesn't come out of the public purse, so there's no real reason for the Government to renege. In the UK it's the power companies that have to pay the tariff, the Government modified the standard condition of their supply licences.

Sarah - ASG