Free solar panel discussion

Gizmosmum_2

grahamc2003 wrote: »

I'm afraid, that with more education, there'd be a lot less 'green' nonsense.

You're welcome to your view, but what formal education backs it up i.e did you study engineering at university like many of the 'naysayers' on here? (I take it you realise that engineering is the formal discipline required to understand energy, energy conversion etc etc). I don’t doubt your sincerity at all - it’s just that I feel you should realise that others, probably better educated in this particular area, may be saying something worthwhile (for the environment)

'Green' to me (these days, sadly) means doing something because of an ideology, and !!!!!! what any engineers say! Seen it with home windmills (B&Q no longer sell them)- how much was spent on those? How much energy spent on manufacturing them, sending them half way around the world, then to all four corners of the uk, how many miles drive by installers? And the benefit - pretty much zero, and sometimes negative. All predicted by 'naysayers’ (i.e. engineers who knew they wouldn't work in that environment). The whole shebang wasn’t very ‘environmental’ was it?

While pv isn't as bad as that, it isn't much better - hence the absolutely massive subsidy of ten times the value of the electricity generated. It isn't about securing our future electricity supply at all - the country would be bankrupt well before that with pv.

All engineers want (what they are trained to do) is get the maximum benefit, taking into account all considerations including the environment, as they always have done, for each pound spent.

In case you think I am alone in these views, here’s a final statement from a student project from a group of mechanical engineering students (yes, it’s obvious even to students) ..

<i>we cannot continue to throw money down the drain for nonsense when real energy solutions can be harvested by real engineers</i>

Did you mean to be patronising or was it accidental? Perhaps those with a "formal education" in another discipline may have found an alternative method of communicating their disagreement.

I have spoken to many engineers who have rubbished cavity wall insulation because when they had their "formal education" that's what they were taught. The same with condensing boilers 20 years ago, solar thermal 15 years ago and no doubt 70 years ago getting to the moon would have been too expensive if not impossible. Of course being a woman dimishes your ability to understand such things too I've equally worked with a lot of decent engineers with open minds and a willingness to embrace new ideas in an attempt to deliver bigger strategic visions.

IMO the FiT isn't supposed to be the answer to all climate change issues, it's a stepping stone and no more. The rates will be reduced as the take up increases and the debate about the so called "loophole" will go on and on but I know that Homesun spoke to DECC before FiT was finalised and others on the forum have said the same about ASG. The loophole may or may not be closed on the 20th October but I'm not entirley sure what's wrong with FiT:

It gives those with a bit of cash the opportunity to get a decent investment in return for being careful with their cash.

It creates jobs for those manufacturing panels in the UK and the myriad of sme's and ASG type businesses that are springing up as a result - better than larger dole queues and bigger social payments.

It allows energy saving and renewable energy to become "mainstream" instead of only being suitable for the sandal brigade (apologies if anyone wears sandals!!)

Even after allowing for the embodied energy it saves some energy although obviously not as much as offshore wind which is looking quite uncertain at the minute.

I have yet to read any energy strategy which indicates that FiT is supposed to alleviate supply and demand, but I could have easily missed it.

Of course the above is only my opinion as someone with a "formal" but non-engineering education.

Cardew

Gizmosmum wrote: »

Did you mean to be patronising or was it accidental? Perhaps those with a "formal education" in another discipline may have found an alternative method of communicating their disagreement.

I have spoken to many engineers who have rubbished cavity wall insulation because when they had their "formal education" that's what they were taught. The same with condensing boilers 20 years ago, solar thermal 15 years ago and no doubt 70 years ago getting to the moon would have been too expensive if not impossible. Of course being a woman dimishes your ability to understand such things too I've equally worked with a lot of decent engineers with open minds and a willingness to embrace new ideas in an attempt to deliver bigger strategic visions.

IMO the FiT isn't supposed to be the answer to all climate change issues, it's a stepping stone and no more. The rates will be reduced as the take up increases and the debate about the so called "loophole" will go on and on but I know that Homesun spoke to DECC before FiT was finalised and others on the forum have said the same about ASG. The loophole may or may not be closed on the 20th October but I'm not entirley sure what's wrong with FiT:

It gives those with a bit of cash the opportunity to get a decent investment in return for being careful with their cash.

It creates jobs for those manufacturing panels in the UK and the myriad of sme's and ASG type businesses that are springing up as a result - better than larger dole queues and bigger social payments.

It allows energy saving and renewable energy to become "mainstream" instead of only being suitable for the sandal brigade (apologies if anyone wears sandals!!)

Even after allowing for the embodied energy it saves some energy although obviously not as much as offshore wind which is looking quite uncertain at the minute.

I have yet to read any energy strategy which indicates that FiT is supposed to alleviate supply and demand, but I could have easily missed it.

Of course the above is only my opinion as someone with a "formal" but non-engineering education.

Well I have never ever heard a single criticism of cavity wall insulation by engineers. In fact every report I have read puts it as one of the most cost effective measures available, and engineers were instrumental in making it mandatory in new building regulations - and it is engineers who draw up the specifications.

With condensing boilers, many engineers(including myself) are sceptical about their value.

The Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors stated recently :

The average cost of installing one of these modern boilers is £1,720, but saves on average just £95 off people's gas bills." See:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukne...erts-warn.html

From the Guardian

But critics argue the switchover is unlikely to be plain sailing. The new systems cost upwards of £2,500 to buy and install - £500 more on average than conventional boilers. And if the many letters from Jobs & Money readers and heating engineers are anything to go by, the boilers come with a hidden surcharge, so high that it can wipe out all the gains for the homeowner and the environment.

Critics argue that condenser boilers malfunction easily and can cost hundreds of pounds a year to maintain. Many survive only half as long as their traditional counterparts. They are technically complex, with many more things that can go wrong than traditional boilers. It can add up to nightmarish bills.

One major independent firm of plumbers said that over the past three to four years it has made thousands of call-outs to mend condensing boilers, and that the greenhouse gas emissions from its vans were probably greater than the savings made by the shift to eco-conscious boilers.

It is the condensing technology that makes new boilers so expensive to repair.

There are scores of posts on MSE from those of us with boilers over 20 years old that rarely if ever go wrong.
There are equally scores of posts from people with newish condensing boilers who have had hugely expensive repairs - often electronic board replacement being required at the cost of £hundreds.

Plenty of evidence to suggest that the design life of condensing boilers is 10 years if you are lucky. Most guarantees are for 2 years. A few for 5 years provided you pay each year for expensive servicing.

Take the average gas consumer spending £700pa on gas. He will be extremely lucky if he saves 25% even if he has a really ancient boiler. So he might save £175 pa.

You will do well to get a boiler fitted for under £2000. That invested long term at even 5% will produce £80 a year after tax(more if compounded) so your net saving will be less than £100 a year.

Only a City banker could not understand those economics

So we are forced into buying complicated equipment, expensive to repair and with a limited life and that's progress?

Solar Thermal is still a joke in money saving terms. The Government commissioned a formal test of eight systems and the savings were derisory.
If engineers had their way, lunar exploration would have been carried out by machines and not humans. A fraction of the cost and better results - machines don't need to breath, can stay longer - in fact we don't have to bring them home to Earth.;)

Poosmate

Thanks Gizmosmum, my net connection has been carp today so not sure if I've been coming or going.

I do feel sorry for people who feel the need to be patronising, they must get so exasperated with others who are always wrong around them. Graham, you are correct in that I have no formal Engineering qualifications but that doesn't mean I have no engineering experience (admittedly not in energy). I study the fields I am interested in and will stay outside of the box thanks.

*wanders back into Poosworld, where minds are allowed to wander, delve and question.* Oh the joys of freedom from the box.

I so hope I can get solar panels fitted before April 2012 and start enjoying the FiTs payments at their maximum rate. I will be happy knowing that I'll have kept a few people in work for a little while longer, that I'll be supplying a little bit of electric to the grid, that British Gas will get their ROC's and that approximately 3 years after installation the electric they generate will be carbon neutral. Oh and I almost forgot, I'll get a little bit of free electric too! Yay!

Poo

grahamc2003

Poosmate wrote: »

Thanks Gizmosmum, my net connection has been carp today so not sure if I've been coming or going.
I do feel sorry for people who feel the need to be patronising, they must get so exasperated with others who are always wrong around them. Graham, you are correct in that I have no formal Engineering qualifications but that doesn't mean I have no engineering experience (admittedly not in energy). I study the fields I am interested in and will stay outside of the box thanks.
*wanders back into Poosworld, where minds are allowed to wander, delve and question.* Oh the joys of freedom from the box.
I so hope I can get solar panels fitted before April 2012 and start enjoying the FiTs payments at their maximum rate. I will be happy knowing that I'll have kept a few people in work for a little while longer, that I'll be supplying a little bit of electric to the grid, that British Gas will get their ROC's and that approximately 3 years after installation the electric they generate will be carbon neutral. Oh and I almost forgot, I'll get a little bit of free electric too! Yay!
Poo

Since 'patronising' seems to be word of the month, I guess I'll just have to use it on you for your views that, with more education, some of the 'naysayers' (a slightly abusive term imv) would come round to your way of thinking!

I said I thought you were genuine in your views, and I even know why you hold them. I said you were welcome to them, and that I respect them - i just don't agree with them.

Shame you (and others on this thread) don't hold the same respect for others' views, genuinely held.

I'd be interested to hear from any of the sanctimonious voices a response to my paragraph about home windmills, which many raved about until recently. I believe it is pertain to solar pv, so not off topic. (In fact, I’d like a non-character assassination response to any of the many points I’ve raised - that would make a refreshing change).

Gizmosmum_2

Cardew I think you missed the point - perhaps I didn't explain as well as I could have. I was merely trying to point out that there are good and bad in every profession as well as differing opinions which everyone is entitled to.

My point is that patronising people (Graham, not you) who don't agree with a particular point of view held by that person potentially allows the thread to degenerate into personal insults rather than debate.

Only my opinion, for what it's worth. Your contribution has always been strong but not patronising, others don't appear to take the same care when responding.

Doc_N

Has anyone getting 'free' electricity from panels on their roof considered the Economy 7 option?

This would seem to fit quite neatly with solar PV, given that the higher daytime rate would be moderated to a considerable extent by the electricity generated.

Poosmate

Doh! I lost my response! I should be in bed - I'm not very well!

Graham, it's just the way you come across.

I can't remember what I typed, I agreed with you on the domestic windmills and now have lost my train of thought again.

I'll have to come back when the meds kick in!

DocN, that sounds like a plan.

Got to go lie down now.

(I feel like) Poo

Underscore

I've had an assessment for a system and can get a 5.6KwP system on the "free" scheme.

I work from home so will have the benefit of using the electricity when its generated in the day.

I'm considering moving within the next 10 years realistically, perhaps a shorter time frame. I have the money to pay for a system myself, but that fact means that I am loath to shell out 15k+ (the roof is pretty large) when I won't get the credit for that (IMO) on the value of the house.

I'm also (haven't read the whole thread!) not sure the maths really stacks up on the DIY side quite so well. Do you just pay for a straightforward maintenance contract? I've read elsewhere that inverters last an average of 5 years so over 25 years of a contract you'd be getting 5 of those on average included?

Any thoughts would be welcomed.

Thanks

Underscore

The more hunting I am doing, the more I think I should cancel this and pay for it myself. Been told I can expect £1400 a year in FiTs for buying a 15k tesco system. And that's without daylight electricity benefits. Even if I won't be here in 10 years time, I think one locked into the highest FiT scheme (if I am correct there?) would be a major selling point and possibly save haggling over 5000/10000 etc.

beedydad

Underscore wrote: »

I've had an assessment for a system and can get a 5.6KwP system on the "free" scheme.

I work from home so will have the benefit of using the electricity when its generated in the day.

I'm considering moving within the next 10 years realistically, perhaps a shorter time frame. I have the money to pay for a system myself, but that fact means that I am loath to shell out 15k+ (the roof is pretty large) when I won't get the credit for that (IMO) on the value of the house.

I'm also (haven't read the whole thread!) not sure the maths really stacks up on the DIY side quite so well. Do you just pay for a straightforward maintenance contract? I've read elsewhere that inverters last an average of 5 years so over 25 years of a contract you'd be getting 5 of those on average included?

Any thoughts would be welcomed.

Thanks

Not heard that you can get a kit above 4kw under the "free" companies - can you name them who is offering such a deal. The maximum FIT return is for under a 4kw PV kit so if you have a larger kit - the returns go down! Would not have thought the "freebee" companies would want that!!!