Feed In Tariffs(FIT) Announced.

Solargain

zeupater wrote: »

Hi

You'll find that the output will be limited by the inverter, I'd guess that it'd be a SB3300, so 3.6kW would be the maximum.

They must have been keen to fit your system. I was talking to Enact whilst they were having meetings with their suppliers regarding the 220W panel system and having requested a quote many weeks ago am still awaiting a survey .... I suppose that it all depends where you are in the country and how much sub-contract coverage Enact have in your area ......

Out of curiosity, what was the lead time from first contact to survey and then to installation ?

Regards

Thanks for the information about the SB3300 - that's helpful.

I suppose I was in reasonably early with the process (mid-March) but it still took about a month of pushing to get the survey done. It was a Mark Group survey for e.on, and it took e.on another month to get the quote out.

By that point I'd found out that Tesco had entered the market, and all they had to do was use the same survey that had been done for e.on. The Tesco quote came out not long after the e.on quote, but it took between then (May) and July to agree a change from the 4.2kWp to 3.96kWp. It took another few weeks after that to installation.

I imagine that now they've sorted out the 3.96kWp design things ought to speed up a bit.

Solargain

mysterons wrote: »

Did you pay the same price as the 4.2kWp system ie £14999?
I ask because they agreed to change mine to 3.96kWp but still wanted to charge me the same amount. I complained especially when I saw the 3.96kWp system has now appeared on the Tesco website at £14499 . They spun me some tale about how the Mark Group had to return the original 175w panels to manufacturer at great expense (don't believe a word of it) but were pleased to be able offer me a further £250 off. I've told them I'm not entirely happy but as it's now the weekend email communication has ceased.
I'll give Enact their due, when I've asked questions they're quick to reply and they did give me a £500 off voucher during the very long wait for a survey which has been applied to my quote.
As it stands at present I'm being asked to pay a bottom line of £14600 which includes £200 odd for non standard scaffolding and £100 for consumer unit upgrade.
I'm hoping they'll do the right thing and give me the other £250 off bringing it into line with the currently advertised system price.
Glad you're pleased with your install, I'm sure I will be happy too eventually once it's up and generating .

@zeupater
Took about 10 weeks to get someone from Mark Group to do a survey. Have you rung them? Letter from Enact thanking me for my enquiry said they'd be in touch within 2 weeks but nothing happened & after 3 weeks I called Mark Group in person.

I paid the £14,499 - but to be fair, there was no need for any panels to be changed. We only agreed the contract after it had been agreed to reduce the size of the system to below 4kWp.

If they do your install as well as they've done mine I think you'll be delighted with it. Mark Group proved to be excellent in every respect. The odd problem that they hit was dealt with quickly, efficiently, and without any fuss - they really did do a superb job, and the guys that did it were all first rate.

John_Pierpoint

For those wondering how to store electricity from trough to peak, here is a giant freezer suggestion.

This application is potentially 80% efficient?

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2010/apr/26/gravel-batteries-renewable-energy-storage

Doc_N

John_Pierpoint wrote: »

For those wondering how to store electricity from trough to peak, here is a giant freezer suggestion.

This application is potentially 80% efficient?

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2010/apr/26/gravel-batteries-renewable-energy-storage

Another excellent reason for a gravel garden!

woodlandsfarm

snowcat53 wrote: »

Good advice no doubt but the 'Installer search' on this page is utterly useless. Put in North West and you get firms from Devon to Scotland to Ireland. Hundreds of them but hardly any actually in the NW!! In fact you get the same firms whatever region you enter so not helpful. Most of these firms won't work that far from their area.

Actually the reason they 'look' as though they are from other regions is because that is how far they will travel. We thought the same but apparently after getting quotes from installers that is the reason

jackieblack

2010mcv wrote: »

Hi

Can anybody tell me if this statement from a local company is true:

It is important to recognise that the Feed-In-Tariff remains with the person that registers as the investor. This means that if you move house you continue to receive the Feed-In-Tariff payments on your previous property. The new owners will have the benefit of reduced grid electricity bills.

I can't find confirmation of this on any of the energy saving sites and am suspicious that this company are claiming this if it is not true.

Thanks

From E-on's website (http://www.eonenergy.com/At-Home/Products/SolarSaver/Getting-FiT-(old).htm )

What happens if I move house?
You have two options. If you chose to sell on your system as part of your home, you can use your Solar Performance Certificate to estimate its future output. This could potentially add to the value of the property. Alternatively, you may be able to agree with the new owner to still receive the FiT payment. The new owner will still benefit from reduced electricity bills, and research has shown that people are willing to pay more for properties that can generate renewable energy5.

Solargain

Slightly worrying article about the Government's attitude to FIT payments in the Guardian on 2 September.

I'm not able to post links as a new member but perhaps someone will do it for me?

Cardew

Solargain wrote: »

Slightly worrying article about the Government's attitude to FIT payments in the Guardian on 2 September.

I'm not able to post links as a new member but perhaps someone will do it for me?

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2010/sep/02/chris-huhne-green-electricity

Great news if it is reviewed.

Absolutely stupid that we - the consumer - all pay those who have a suitable roof; when the vast majority cannot have panels fitted even if we wanted them.(wrong size, wrong orientation, shaded, rented property etc)

Even more stupid is to allow firms like ASG etc to cash in on the scheme meant for private households.

Doc_N

Cardew wrote: »

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2010/sep/02/chris-huhne-green-electricity

Absolutely stupid that we - the consumer - all pay those who have a suitable roof; when the vast majority cannot have panels fitted even if we wanted them.(wrong size, wrong orientation, shaded, rented property etc)

It's for the greater good, though. By the same logic, nobody without children would be expected to contribute, through their taxes, towards the cost of education.

cliffski

Doc_N wrote: »

It's for the greater good, though. By the same logic, nobody without children would be expected to contribute, through their taxes, towards the cost of education.

Couldn't agree more. My taxes subsidise everyone elses kids, child benefit, free education for them for 18 years, and a 'child trust fund' !!!!!!. Who pays for all that? Apparently the next generation of taxpayers, because genius gordon borrowed the money to pay for it all.

The amount of money being paid in FITs is absolutely miniscule in comparison with government spending on handouts for everyone who has kids, or 'cold-weather' payments for retired millionaires living in spain. You have to be seriously anti-renewables to find the FIT objectionable.