Free solar power system. Is it a scam?

Jon_Tiffany

K4blades wrote: »

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.

Exactly, everyone else seems to think that 50% is reasonable. I'm pretty sure that we use way more than 50% with our (small) system, although I havn't mentioned it much as I dont have any figures to back this up other than being based on last years meter readings. If I get time I'll set up my monitor and record some figures, but we will of course need around 6 months worth before having anything meaning full.

I agree with you and Doc N, this thread has become monotonous, long and boring. Even when I post real facts and data I find they are picked at, with some seeming desperate to find any hole they can. Too much of a political agenda going on here. On any other fourm with more active moderators a thread like this would have been locked long ago.

I'm out :wave:

Cardew

K4blades wrote: »

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.

What is it you feel 'people new to the topic' should read? Just a one sided view of the exaggerated(IMO) benefits of a rent a roof scheme; without any pitfalls being discussed - on an internet forum.

If you don't want to read the thread - the solution is easy; the course Doc N and John T have decided to take.

keith_r59

I can see merits in both sides of the argument but as with any debate I would like to see more independent data published before pinning my flag to the mast one way or the other. I don't have a large enough house for the "rent-a-roof" scheme myself so I have had a small 6 panel 1.32 kWp system installed. Prior to it's installation I did record my weekly electricity usage over a period of 18 months so I do have a good idea as to how much solar power I'm actually using but until I've gone through the summer months any annual savings calculation would be a guess.

If this thread is still going on the anniversary of my installation I will publish my first years data for all to see.

XRayDave

Hi Keith

That would be very useful and I for one would love to see that data. Are you able to publish the "to date" figures?

Kind regards and best wishes for 2011.

Dave

Cardew

keith_r59 wrote: »

I can see merits in both sides of the argument but as with any debate I would like to see more independent data published before pinning my flag to the mast one way or the other. I don't have a large enough house for the "rent-a-roof" scheme myself so I have had a small 6 panel 1.32 kWp system installed. Prior to it's installation I did record my weekly electricity usage over a period of 18 months so I do have a good idea as to how much solar power I'm actually using but until I've gone through the summer months any annual savings calculation would be a guess.

If this thread is still going on the anniversary of my installation I will publish my first years data for all to see.

With a small system like yours I suspect that 50% usage is perfectly feasible. In fact Mcfi5 who has a similar sized system has reported about 500kWh pa measured with an export meter.(which is the only way to be sure of data)

The contentious issue is what internal consumption would be achieved with a larger system like ASG's(3.3kWp)

If you achieve 50%, that cannot be extrapolated to 'prove' that 50% is normal for larger systems.

grahamc2003

K4blades wrote: »

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.

Ah I see, those who don't happen to agree with your guesses about these things 'have an agenda' do they?

Maybe they do. My agenda is to supply an informed opinion of these things, and counteract the one sided largely ignorant views you seem to always post, with seemingly almost no appreciation of the physics involved.

Asd to the 50% figures being acceptable to the industry and government - well could I guide you to do some research on the government approved database of windspeeds used to forecast home wind turbines?

Spend half an hour doing that, then come back and report what you find, then perhaps reassess you confidence in government approved methods of estimating these things.

keith_r59

Cardew wrote: »

With a small system like yours I suspect that 50% usage is perfectly feasible. In fact Mcfi5 who has a similar sized system has reported about 500kWh pa measured with an export meter.(which is the only way to be sure of data)

The contentious issue is what internal consumption would be achieved with a larger system like ASG's(3.3kWp)

If you achieve 50%, that cannot be extrapolated to 'prove' that 50% is normal for larger systems.

With respect, I wasn't intending to extrapolate the figures to 'prove' anything. My point is unless you have a full years data, and a good idea of your previous usage, then anything else would be a guess. And as for export meters, very few people will have these installed so other methods of calculating usage will have to be devised to provide realistic data.

keith_r59

XRayDave wrote: »

Hi Keith

That would be very useful and I for one would love to see that data. Are you able to publish the "to date" figures?

Kind regards and best wishes for 2011.

Dave

Hi Dave

The "to date" figures won't really mean a lot especially as during the latter part of December the panels were covered in snow and not producing anything. Best to wait until I have a full years information.

Regards,

Keith

prunus

Well, reading this thread has been extremely interesting if somewhat tiring.

I'm only posting because I want to express my appreciation of people like Cardew and others who so freely give of their time and expertise to others for absolutely no financial return. This sort of input and cooperation makes the Internet worthwhile.

I really hope that the constructive posters on this excellent forum have a great 2011.

Cardew

keith_r59 wrote: »

With respect, I wasn't intending to extrapolate the figures to 'prove' anything. My point is unless you have a full years data, and a good idea of your previous usage, then anything else would be a guess. And as for export meters, very few people will have these installed so other methods of calculating usage will have to be devised to provide realistic data.

I appreciate you might not intend to extrapolate the figures - perhaps it would have been better if I had said "it is not possible to extrapolate the 50% consumption figure on a small system and apply it to a large system"

As for the provision of realistic data, the introduction of smart meters could solve that problem.