Free solar power system. Is it a scam?

Jon_Tiffany

K4blades wrote: »

They also employ lots of people who pay income tax, many of whom, in the current climate, may not be working otherwise and claiming benefits.

And it all helps towards reducing our dependance on oil and gas. The North Sea has been in decline since 1999 and we are becoming ever more dependant on other countries for our energy. It will be many years and many billions of pounds paid to forgien companies before we get those nukes up and running.

Gizmosmum_2

K4blades wrote: »

Do you mean SAP assessment or RDSAP, either way, I don't see the point as they don't accurately reflect FITs.
Under RDSAP, the figures are way out due to the defaults used being way out of date. With the latest updates to SAP, they have been brought more into line, but only just. It is assumed that 50% of the electricity is used, and the other 50% exported, with an export rate of about 12p per kwh. SAPs have a lot of uses, but calculating financial savings through FITs is not one of them, though it would give you a good idea of how much less CO2 you would be emitting.
Your general point about surveys is a good one though, I can't see any reputable installer fitting without a proper survey, especially if they are paying the insurance, as is the case with the rent a roof schemes.
I know of someone who was told by ASG that they couldn't install on their roof unless it was strengthened and checked by building control. ASG told him that they couldn't do the work, let alone charge for it, but they recommended a couple of local firms that could. It was then up to him if he wanted to proceed.
A couple of months ago, ASG also announced they were fitting a slightly smaller system which gave them more flexibilty, ie smaller size means less weight.

Sounds like ASG have got everything covered -I have to say they would be my choice if I wanted free panels. I'm not convinced that people buying their own systems are getting the same service though. Does your home insurance cover you if the wind damages the panels and/or the roof if you've had panels installed without first having a structural survey??? I think I must be one of life's worriers - none of the installers I talk to seem too concerned about carrying out a structural survey.

XRayDave

beedydad wrote: »

What I find extrordinary is that whilst you have been seemingly pleased with the generated power and you and others are argueing over how much of this you have actually used - may be 50% +/-

Anyway based on your figures they have earned to date:-

1780 x 41.3p = £735.14
1780 x 3p x 50% = £ 26.70

A grand total of £761.84 -

Which is probably about 10 x what you have gained - that is if you can accurately calculate the figure.

Finally i would think your move of supplier to change from 13.5 down to under 10p has probably/will have saved you much more than anything you have gained from solar!!

Regards

Point #1

I wasn't aware that I was arguing with anyone. I merely stated that I was making an assumption (which seems reasonable) that we would use approx 50% of the electricity generated by the PV system. Without an export meter, it is really hard to quantify the usage/savings.

Point #2

I said in an earlier post: "...So, based on 50% usage (rough guess) and 10p/kWh (reasonable unit cost), this has saved just about £90 (which I'd rather have in my pocket than the power company's)".

To reitorate, any saving that I have made from a system which has cost me nothing is worth every penny.

True, switching energy supplier may have actually saved me more cash than ASG's PV system, but if I end up paying several hundred pounds less this year than last for electricity by a combination of switching supplier and/or installing a PV system - I'll take it!

As far as your figures go...

The PV system would have cost me in the region of £15,000 (that I don't/didn't have lying around spare). Combined savings of the FiT payment, the export fee and the savings from the electricity generated from the panels would have made a year-long saving in the region of £1000 - which means a payback period on the PV system of 15 years. So, only after 15 years had passed would I be making any real savings.

With the currently installed ASG "rent-a-roof" system, I save money from Day #1 and am currently looking at a prospective year-long saving in the region of £150-200 (let's say £175 to keep things simple).

So (ignoring inflation/energy price-hikes etc which we have no way of quantifying now for up to 15 years into the future), this £175 per year saving means that regardless of receiving any Fit or export payment, I will save £2625 (likely to be far higher as energy costs rise).

So, a simple comparison. Pay for my system and be effectively "out of pocket" for the next 15 years, of install ASG's system and save myself £175 per year or £2625 in total. Seems like a "no-brainer" to me, given that I didn't have the capital to pay for the system anyway.

This thread has the title "Free solar power system. Is it a scam?" As has already been discussed ad-nauseam on this thread, the actual answer (at least in ASG's case - the only one I can comment on) is a resounding "No."

Anyway, to move the discussion forward, I simply posted my figures and comments to help others decide whether they could benefit from such a system. As I said at the top of this post, I wasn't aware that I was arguing with anyone.

XRD

Cardew

XRayDave wrote: »

With the currently installed ASG "rent-a-roof" system, I save money from Day #1 and am currently looking at a prospective year-long saving in the region of £150-200 (let's say £175 to keep things simple).

So (ignoring inflation/energy price-hikes etc which we have no way of quantifying now for up to 15 years into the future), this £175 per year saving means that regardless of receiving any Fit or export payment, I will save £2625 (likely to be far higher as energy costs rise).

So, a simple comparison. Pay for my system and be effectively "out of pocket" for the next 15 years, of install ASG's system and save myself £175 per year or £2625 in total. Seems like a "no-brainer" to me, given that I didn't have the capital to pay for the system anyway.


Anyway, to move the discussion forward, I simply posted my figures and comments to help others decide whether they could benefit from such a system. As I said at the top of this post, I wasn't aware that I was arguing with anyone.

XRD

This discussion is really about the level of savings and some of us feel that your assumption of an £175 pa saving is a gross over-estimate if you are offering up that figure "to help others decide".

Personally I think many people will struggle to achieve half those savings.

Just my estimate, but I suggest every bit as valid as yours?

At least on MSE there have been examples of people with(owned) systems who have posted figures, and similar on the internet that support my contention, and I have seen nothing to indicate your figures are achieved.

The point being that we all have a price! I doubt many would allow ASG to make a load of money from THEIR roof for, say, a nominal £1 a year.

Personally I wouldn't dream of allowing a firm to use my roof for less than 50% of the gross income they receive(around £1,300pa with ASG)

Jon_Tiffany

Cardew wrote: »

This discussion is really about the level of savings and some of us feel that your assumption of an £175 pa saving is a gross over-estimate if you are offering up that figure "to help others decide".

Personally I think many people will struggle to achieve half those savings.

Just my estimate, but I suggest every bit as valid as yours?

At least on MSE there have been examples of people with(owned) systems who have posted figures, and similar on the internet that support my contention, and I have seen nothing to indicate your figures are achieved.

The point being that we all have a price! I doubt many would allow ASG to make a load of money from THEIR roof for, say, a nominal £1 a year.

Personally I wouldn't dream of allowing a firm to use my roof for less than 50% of the gross income they receive(around £1,300pa with ASG)

As said many times before its perfectly reasonable to assume 50% export. Some will use more and some will use less.

Why would ASG give you 50% of the gross income? You havn't stumped up 50% of the capital cost up front have you.

Cardew, its very obvious that you have a grudge against ASG and in the spirit of 'money saving' it should be made clear that you will save money with ASGs system. So what if ASG make some money? They are employing people and I also assume that they are a British company.

XrayDave unlike other posters on here actually has an ASG system and I feel that its wrong to give him a hard time when he is very kindly going to the trouble of posting his experiences on here.

Now that we have established that the ASG system is not a scam I think this thread would be a whole load better if it could focus on getting the best out of a solar pv system, rather than continously looking for any hole or arguement to try to discredit ASG and solar systems.

K4blades

Thats a very good post, Jon.

So much of this thread has been wasted by people going round in circles, repeating the same old stuff, often without any real facts or evidence.
Most people would visit this thread for genuine advice about if the schemes are a scam, or if they are going to save money, and aren't interested in other agendas.

Cardew

Jon_Tiffany wrote: »

As said many times before its perfectly reasonable to assume 50% export. Some will use more and some will use less.

Why would ASG give you 50% of the gross income? You havn't stumped up 50% of the capital cost up front have you.

Cardew, its very obvious that you have a grudge against ASG and in the spirit of 'money saving' it should be made clear that you will save money with ASGs system. So what if ASG make some money? They are employing people and I also assume that they are a British company.

XrayDave unlike other posters on here actually has an ASG system and I feel that its wrong to give him a hard time when he is very kindly going to the trouble of posting his experiences on here.

Now that we have established that the ASG system is not a scam I think this thread would be a whole load better if it could focus on getting the best out of a solar pv system, rather than continously looking for any hole or arguement to try to discredit ASG and solar systems.

I have stated repeatedly that ASG seem to bea very good and reliable firm and I certainly have no grudge against the company.

I have an objection to the concept of these 'rent a roof' companies financed by venture capitalists being allowed to cash in on subsidies that we the customer pay; but that is down to the Government - not companies who take advantage.

My intervention at this point was to challenge the assumption that 50% of a large system(3.3kWp) used in the house is 'perfectly reasonable' and to then give that a value of £175 or £180.

You have given no explanation why you think 50% of a large system is 'perfectly reasonable' yet I, and others, have at least given reasons why we feel that figure is an over-estimate.

Earlier in this thread Sarah from ASG was talking in terms of £100 a year.

'Repeated assertion ain't proof' (on both sides!)

If people are weighing up the pros and cons of having a 'rent a roof' system, at least let them do so on realistic estimates of the financial benefits, and have the downside of signing legally binding documents to allow a company to use your roof for 25 years. - not least that it is binding on future owners.

P.S.
I certainly haven't given Xray Dave a hard time, merely challenged that his assumption on savings would be typical.

beedydad

XRayDave wrote: »

Point #1

I wasn't aware that I was arguing with anyone. I merely stated that I was making an assumption (which seems reasonable) that we would use approx 50% of the electricity generated by the PV system. Without an export meter, it is really hard to quantify the usage/savings.

Point #2

I said in an earlier post: "...So, based on 50% usage (rough guess) and 10p/kWh (reasonable unit cost), this has saved just about £90 (which I'd rather have in my pocket than the power company's)".

To reitorate, any saving that I have made from a system which has cost me nothing is worth every penny.

True, switching energy supplier may have actually saved me more cash than ASG's PV system, but if I end up paying several hundred pounds less this year than last for electricity by a combination of switching supplier and/or installing a PV system - I'll take it!

As far as your figures go...

The PV system would have cost me in the region of £15,000 (that I don't/didn't have lying around spare). Combined savings of the FiT payment, the export fee and the savings from the electricity generated from the panels would have made a year-long saving in the region of £1000 - which means a payback period on the PV system of 15 years. So, only after 15 years had passed would I be making any real savings.

With the currently installed ASG "rent-a-roof" system, I save money from Day #1 and am currently looking at a prospective year-long saving in the region of £150-200 (let's say £175 to keep things simple).

So (ignoring inflation/energy price-hikes etc which we have no way of quantifying now for up to 15 years into the future), this £175 per year saving means that regardless of receiving any Fit or export payment, I will save £2625 (likely to be far higher as energy costs rise).

So, a simple comparison. Pay for my system and be effectively "out of pocket" for the next 15 years, of install ASG's system and save myself £175 per year or £2625 in total. Seems like a "no-brainer" to me, given that I didn't have the capital to pay for the system anyway.

This thread has the title "Free solar power system. Is it a scam?" As has already been discussed ad-nauseam on this thread, the actual answer (at least in ASG's case - the only one I can comment on) is a resounding "No."

Anyway, to move the discussion forward, I simply posted my figures and comments to help others decide whether they could benefit from such a system. As I said at the top of this post, I wasn't aware that I was arguing with anyone.

XRD

X Ray Dave

Thanks for your comments. Can I apologise if you thought I was accusing you of argueing over the amount used versus that exported. It was meant to be a general observation that many are seemingly "debating" about the ability to actually establish the amount of energy used without an export meter being installed as well.

I would state that at times it maybe above the 50% and at times below hence using the 50% +/- in my earlier post. Only 2, at present, owners have come forward with actual verifiable figures and it would be good and helpful to have more.

My second point was that the "tennant" of the "free" solar has to (probably) adjust their living arrangments to maximise the timings of any electrical gizmo's to be in use around the 2 hours either side of say, midday - so it can be a bit inconvenient for some and not always appropriate - so at times their will be losses over gains, when at max output.

On costs - your figures seem to be wrong as you have stated that the FIT would give a "year long saving of £1,000" that should be, based on the figures you supplied and as I quoted of approx £1,500 if the 2nd half of the year equates to the 1st.

Therefore actually at least a 10% yield is being achieved and the payback will be far shorter than you summise.

I also am aware of the cost of kits and the figure for a rent a roof would be far lower than the £15k you summise (and should be for your own instal!)

The payback would therefore be, to them, as others have quoted be 7 - 8 years. Being generous would be @ 10 years for you.


Over the 15 years you have stated your total FIT, if left level would have been £1,500 + £175 (your usage) = £1,675 x 15 = £25,125 - easily more than enough to have purchased outright your very own equivalent system - with a further 10 years, at least, to go!

With loans available dedicated to this market, you may not have your own capital in cash but could either use your house as colaterol, so there are many options to have considered, before stating the rent a roof is a no brainer

Doc_N

This now has to be one of the most boring, monotonous threads on the entire forum. I'm out. :wave:

K4blades

As SAPs were mentioned earlier, it ought to be mentioned, again, that in these calculations, approved by the Government, and calculated by BRE, that 50% is reasonable, EST also say 50%, and the utilities use 50% as a figure to base payments on when no monitor is used. Of course, they could all be wrong, but if its good enough to be used by professionals throughout the industry, then why can't it be good enough for these discussions.......based on a couple of peoples experiences......and ignoring the experiences of others.

Like I said, just going round in circles....Doc N is right, it is totally monotonous, which is a shame, because people new to the topic can't be bothered to read the whole thread. So those with agendas and little else, are potentially stopping people from getting this benefit. How sad it is that they can't find something more constructive do do.