Free solar panel discussion

Gizmosmum_2

bonzocat99 wrote: »

Thank you Gizmosmum!

I take your point and if indeed demand has been so high and I can well imagine it has, I'll give them a bit longer. I do get suspicious of 'undeliverable' email responses, when it has worked OK in the past and of someone who works in the energy business asking me to explain Economy7 to him, does not fill me with confidence but perhaps I was his first call straight from his training class. We'll see! Thanks again.

Sorry Bonzocat forget to comment on the E7 situation. Basically not a cat in hell's chance of bypassing the E7 and charging the storage heaters. You'd be lucky to cover the whole cost of washing machine cycle on a sunny day. Best to use E7 to it's full extent for heating and hot water and everything else at peak solar production say between 11 and 3.

You're right about expecting them to know about E7 but if you want some decent impartial advice ring the energy Saving trust advice centre on 0800 512012 and pick their brains.

Cardew

M4ximillion wrote: »

Just thinking about this loophole business - yeah i do think from time to time Cardew;). If it were a loophole wouldnt the government have closed it when they had chance when they announced all the cuts?

I suspect that the reason why the loophole was not closed is because it is 'cost neutral' to the Government i.e. the subsidy is collected from all electricity customers via a levy on their bills and not from Tax revenue.

The FIT scheme has a reducing scale of subsidy with the maximum rate paid for small PV installations of less than 4kWp. The rate of subsidy drops progressively as the size of installation increases and then above a certain level reverts to the old(and much lower) ROC payments.

Firms like ASG and BG are now going to install scores of thousands of sub 4kWp systems on scores of thousands of roofs simply to get the maximum subsidy per kWh.

By any common sense logic these firms are large scale generators with multi MW outputs. Why not treat them as such?

Or end this charade and let them assemble massive wind farms in Southern England and save huge amounts on installation and maintenance costs whilst paying them the large subsidy. That would obviously increase both output and efficiency.

Mcfi5dhc

Cardew wrote: »

Firms like ASG and BG are now going to install scores of thousands of sub 4kWp systems on scores of thousands of roofs simply to get the maximum subsidy per kWh.

You'll need to include SSE going forward as well in the list of firms.
They are doing 2.35kwp systems, announced yesterday

(apologies if someone has already posted this)

Jon_Tiffany

Cardew wrote: »

Or end this charade and let them assemble massive wind farms in Southern England and save huge amounts on installation and maintenance costs whilst paying them the large subsidy. That would obviously increase both output and efficiency.

I agree, but the NIMBYs will do everything in their power to stop this country from making any progress.

Wind power is much cheaper in terms of £ per kWh, but everyone objects to them because they are worried about the value of their house.

While I'm not keen on nuclear for obvious reasons, I fear that we have no choice but include it as part of the mix.

It now looks like all the big energy companies are getting in on the act. I have no problem with new, startup British owned companies making a profit, they are creating jobs. I have to admit I dont like the idea of the big players (BG and SSE) profiting out of this, especially as some of them are owned by forgien companies.

The party wont last for long, I predict that the rates for solar pv will drop massively in the review next year. I reckon most of the free offers will disapear at the same time.

But regardless of how we got there, no one can deny that we will have made a big increase in our renewable energy capacity.

K4blades

How much is your roof worth?
Beedeydad keeps going on about getting a better rent for it, but has not fed back on here if he has tried doing it.
Cardew wants a 50/50 split. Unlikely to happen as the provider is taking all the risk, costs, maintenance, etc while all you are doing is allowing someone else to use your roof space.
Then there are those who say you are devaluing your house. Well its a fact that buying your own, adds value, but is that the case when they are not owned by you. Its too early to say, but there is no evidence to suggest your house would be worth less. The number of applications these firms are getting, and many being turned down, suggests the demand is there, which drives prices up, this is likely to increase as electricity prices increase. As for as I know, only 1 maybe 2, mortgage companies are refusing these agreements, the vast majority will accept them, suggesting they see it as something that adds value, so though the banks aren't perfect, I would rather rely on that, than the opinions of someone on here.
So lets look at the argument that we are all paying for the FITs, the implication is that we would have lower bills if it weren't for FITs, does anyone seriously believe this, Cardew? Graham?, anyone. As I have posted elsewhere the money would simply get spent on something else.
However, lets accept that argument.
Taking ASGs figures of a FIT income of £1284 per annum.
Now I know this will vary massively across all the different installers, but it is quite typical.
The most optimistic figure I have seen is for a total of 200,000 installations, though I think it will be much less than this, and that includes the private individuals.
But if we did have 200,000 installations, at a cost of £1284 each, thats a total annual cost of £256 million.
Wow, a lot of money.
But if we are all paying for it, (and assuming by all, we only mean domestic customers, not commercial), there are 25million houses in this country,
so £256million, divided by 25million, means each house has to contribute just over a tenner to fund FITs. So if you have a system installed from the likes of ASG, and reduce your bill my more than a tenner, your on the winning side.
Of course, if you don't or can't you're £10 a year worse off, but so what. I have to pay for all sorts of things that I don't directly benefit from, its called capitalism.

HalloweenJack

Thank you for the replies ;

so can i ask - what exactly do you want to do with your roof then?

if you personally feel that the companies are earning too much from the installation , sadly as mentioned your suggestion of a 50/50 split wont be cost effective (profit margins) and whilst a ncie idea wont happen; same as getting a company to pay `more rent` again it wont happen.

but honestly - if you want to rent your roof like this then its down to the person - from the time i`ve read this thread - there does seem to be quite some fanatical polorisation on opinions.

maybe 1 thing thats not mentioned that i can see - is once they `rent your roof` , if something occurs to said roof over the contract period - they will have to pay for it , including , potentially , reroofing the house , at there cost.

small print on the contracts i think - anyone read that?

Mcfi5dhc

K4blades wrote: »

How much is your roof worth?

On tescos website, they have kindly worked this out for you.

If you installed a 2.115kwp system, you would make a profit of around £19,128 after 25 years (obviously you could reinvest it, pay off the debt etc etc)

So, your roof is worth around £20,000 to me at least, if its this size.

If you give that away for £2000, then you have just lost £18,000.

If you can't afford solar panels, you would save £18,000 by doing nothing, and selling your house whenever you want (5 years time, 10 years time etc) to a regular person.


By the way, they will not pay to re-roof your house. They will take the panels off for a couple of weeks while YOU pay to reroof your house. Then they'll put them back on again.

Jon_Tiffany

Mcfi5dhc wrote: »

On tescos website, they have kindly worked this out for you.

If you installed a 2.115kwp system, you would make a profit of around £19,128 after 25 years (obviously you could reinvest it, pay off the debt etc etc)

So, your roof is worth around £20,000 to me at least, if its this size.

If you give that away for £2000, then you have just lost £18,000.

If you can't afford solar panels, you would save £18,000 by doing nothing, and selling your house whenever you want (5 years time, 10 years time etc) to a regular person.


By the way, they will not pay to re-roof your house. They will take the panels off for a couple of weeks while YOU pay to reroof your house. Then they'll put them back on again.

Wow, massive flaw in this. You dont lose or save £18,000 at all.

What you lose is the oppertunity to gain £18,000 (over 25 years, some of us may not even live that long) - but if you dont have the money to buy your own panels you will never have the chance anyway.

Jon_Tiffany

K4blades wrote: »

Taking ASGs figures of a FIT income of £1284 per annum.
Now I know this will vary massively across all the different installers, but it is quite typical.
The most optimistic figure I have seen is for a total of 200,000 installations, though I think it will be much less than this, and that includes the private individuals.
But if we did have 200,000 installations, at a cost of £1284 each, thats a total annual cost of £256 million.
Wow, a lot of money.
But if we are all paying for it, (and assuming by all, we only mean domestic customers, not commercial), there are 25million houses in this country,
so £256million, divided by 25million, means each house has to contribute just over a tenner to fund FITs. So if you have a system installed from the likes of ASG, and reduce your bill my more than a tenner, your on the winning side.
Of course, if you don't or can't you're £10 a year worse off, but so what. I have to pay for all sorts of things that I don't directly benefit from, its called capitalism.

There is a slight error in your calculation.

Around half of the leccy in the uk is consumed by industry and commercial buildings, who will also be paying for the FITs.

So using your figures, that makes it only £5 a year. When I did this calculation a while back I came to £8 a year. Hardly enough to push people into poverty.

K4blades

Mcfi5dhc wrote: »

On tescos website, they have kindly worked this out for you.

If you installed a 2.115kwp system, you would make a profit of around £19,128 after 25 years (obviously you could reinvest it, pay off the debt etc etc)

So, your roof is worth around £20,000 to me at least, if its this size.

If you give that away for £2000, then you have just lost £18,000.

If you can't afford solar panels, you would save £18,000 by doing nothing, and selling your house whenever you want (5 years time, 10 years time etc) to a regular person.


By the way, they will not pay to re-roof your house. They will take the panels off for a couple of weeks while YOU pay to reroof your house. Then they'll put them back on again.

How very silly.
Your roof doesn't return £19128, its your money that you have spent on buying the panels that brings that return. Your roof just happens to beneath the panels.
I don't dispute if you have the money to invest, the scheme is a good way to get a decent return. But if you haven't, and your roof is going to be there either way, you might as well get something rather than nothing.

Why do people keep going on about what might happen...was it Graham that said you might suddenly find yourself £20K better off next year and want to buy them. You might also win £50million on the Eurolottery and go and live in Spain, but most of us don't have our heads in the clouds, we make decisions based on real life probabilities.