Free solar panel discussion

mickess

I've read a lot of the comments on here. Lots of arguments about whether solar is worth it as an investment, how much you will get etc, etc.

After a considerable amount of research over several years I finally decided to purchase solar pv panels. I considered all the options but the deciding factor was the feed in tariff. Thanks to my wife I have records of power usage going back to 1979 and have continued this with a solar spreadsheet so I could see that without FIT the economics didn't really add up.

Our system has been installed for a month and in that time it has exceeded my expectations during a time when the weather has been variable to say the least. Total generation has been 480 kwh worth over £200 tax free on the Feed in Tariff! Yes I know it's summer but even if I get less than a quarter of that figure during the 'dark' months I will be satisfied. Before installation I decided I would be happy with returns of around £1000 a year on the FIT. It looks like I will exceed that but only time will tell.

My main reason for buying solar pv was the pathetic return I get on my money in the bank. I considered it as an investment but not only one in the normal way of % returns, rather I likened it to any purchase of goods I might make. Consider if you 'invest' a new car for around £15000. What is it worth in 9 years? What would it cost in servicing and insurance in addition over 9 years? Consider the purchase of almost anything else. A new bathroom or kitchen? A new tv or stereo system? I also considered that if I were to move during that period my house would be more saleable. What would you buy? A house that saved you electricity and gave you a small tax free income or an identical one with full running costs? Consider also the effect that inflation may have on electricity prices. Even the most optimistic economist would agree that electricity costs will go up considerably in that time. Yet if I save only a quarter of my electricity costs by generation my increases will be considerably less than yours. Consider also that during that time the feed in tariff is both tax free and will increase in line with inflation. Lastly consider that my system should pay for itself in under 9 years and then all receipts go towards reducing my cost of living.

In my humble opinion, if you can possibly afford it, buy it!

Gizmosmum_2

I'm thinking that if I'm going to see an increase of approx £300 a year on my fuel bills to service the FIT then that also feeds into the financial equation. So 43p/kwh generated, free electric and at least the £300 quid extra that we'll all eventually pay will generate an income (in the form of solar pv).

My dilemna is pay a lump sum off the mortgage - interest rates a V low I'm only paying 1.5% at the minute BUT that's likely to go up in the next couple of years or invest in pv and pay a smaller amount off the mortgage each year with the savings from FIT. Or I could wait for the green investment bank and maybe have my cake and eat it. Borrow the money at a low rate, payback through the FIT and make a lump sum payment off my mortgage.

Any thoughts????

Gizmosmum_2

mickess wrote: »

I've read a lot of the comments on here. Lots of arguments about whether solar is worth it as an investment, how much you will get etc, etc.

After a considerable amount of research over several years I finally decided to purchase solar pv panels. I considered all the options but the deciding factor was the feed in tariff. Thanks to my wife I have records of power usage going back to 1979 and have continued this with a solar spreadsheet so I could see that without FIT the economics didn't really add up.

Our system has been installed for a month and in that time it has exceeded my expectations during a time when the weather has been variable to say the least. Total generation has been 480 kwh worth over £200 tax free on the Feed in Tariff! Yes I know it's summer but even if I get less than a quarter of that figure during the 'dark' months I will be satisfied. Before installation I decided I would be happy with returns of around £1000 a year on the FIT. It looks like I will exceed that but only time will tell.

My main reason for buying solar pv was the pathetic return I get on my money in the bank. I considered it as an investment but not only one in the normal way of % returns, rather I likened it to any purchase of goods I might make. Consider if you 'invest' a new car for around £15000. What is it worth in 9 years? What would it cost in servicing and insurance in addition over 9 years? Consider the purchase of almost anything else. A new bathroom or kitchen? A new tv or stereo system? I also considered that if I were to move during that period my house would be more saleable. What would you buy? A house that saved you electricity and gave you a small tax free income or an identical one with full running costs? Consider also the effect that inflation may have on electricity prices. Even the most optimistic economist would agree that electricity costs will go up considerably in that time. Yet if I save only a quarter of my electricity costs by generation my increases will be considerably less than yours. Consider also that during that time the feed in tariff is both tax free and will increase in line with inflation. Lastly consider that my system should pay for itself in under 9 years and then all receipts go towards reducing my cost of living.

In my humble opinion, if you can possibly afford it, buy it!

Who installed for you and what size panels?

David_Partington

I would disagree with Martin when he says Solar power can't be stored, with the right set up all electrical energy can be stored, with some losses due to inefficiency. All that is required is a few batteries, inverters etc. The trouble with solar is that unless you do store the energy from it, it will not supply the household with enough power to say, boil a kettle, i.e. the panels do not provide high enough current. On Its own solar is sufficient for low current appliances, lights, TVs etc. when these are not being used by the household the surplus power goes to the national grid in this scheme. If you invested in enough storage capacity (batteries) and a high current inverter and probably another source of energy as well, such as a wind turbine, enough energy could feasibly be stored to meet a full households requirements round the clock, but it would be expensive.

digitaltoast

John_Pierpoint wrote: »

There is a "gold rush" on at the moment. The industry must be full of redundant HIP salesmen who have done a 24 hour conversion course, all working as salesmen for the boss who is an electrician who has done a week's course to become MCS approved..

grahamc2003 wrote: »

solar panels will make no difference whatsoever to the powercuts. They will initially come at periods of high demand, which is the period around 5pm/6pm during winter, when the total solar panel output will be zero.

At best, solar panels displace cheap and highly efficient daytime generation, and replace zero high cost, higher emission generation. While they have an element of environmental benefit (at an extraordinary high cost though) the warm 'green' feeling many seem to get from their PVs is largely misplaced in reality.

At last we're getting some sense here! Before people start embarrassing themselves by talking nonsense which could only have come straight from the mouths of a snake oi... sorry, solar power salesman, you'd do well to read Graham and John's posts, and at least the chapters on solar energy from this: http://www.withouthotair.com/ and this blog post from environmentalist George Monbiot.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/mar/01/solar-panel-feed-in-tariff

David_Partington wrote: »

I would disagree with Martin when he says Solar power can't be stored, with the right set up all electrical energy can be stored, with some losses due to inefficiency. All that is required is a few batteries, inverters etc. If you invested in enough storage capacity (batteries) and a high current inverter and probably another source of energy as well, such as a wind turbine, enough energy could feasibly be stored to meet a full households requirements round the clock, but it would be expensive.

Not just expensive (and I mean REALLY expensive) but environmentally appalling with all those lead acid batteries needing to be reconditioned every 4 or 5 years, the costs of maintenance on the turbine etc.

There was a very pro wind turbine site which has now vanished, which is a shame, because this guy said it "proved" that small-scale wind was a great idea.
Except , he obviously got sick of people doing inconvenient things like noticing all the missing variables.

Basically, his FAQ said, "well, of COURSE I haven't factored in things like maintenance, inverter losses, battery replacement etc. That would complicate things".
Very scientific.

Tell you what, why doesn't someone post a picture here of their monitoring box showing overall and current generation?
Pick mid-day on a sunny day if you want. That's my challenge.

I've visited so many solar PV installations and not one of them even come close to half of what they say. There was a showhome in Reading which says "this home is powered by solar tiles". 2pm on a bright clear sunny day, it was generating 450 watts. That's less than one quarter of a kettle.

The roof at the centre for alternative technology in Wales produces a tiny fraction of what it was meant to.

And when some eco bloke whose name I forget opened up his £800,000 showcase home in Worcester, he went on and on about how great his solar was.
When people starting asking to see the box which showed the generated units, every excuse under the sun came out - and he became quite hostile, accused us of accusing him of lying and ended his open day right then!

The day someone can show me a solar pv installation which will have a hope of paying for itself before the end of the cell lifetime *on its own merits* (ie: not grossly subsidised by little old ladies with east facing roofs) is the day I'll retract all the above.

Until then, show me the stats or stop spouting gibberish!

David_Partington

Have noticed some comments earlier about shortfalls in generating capacity due to closure of power stations. The underlying reason for this is privitisation (by Thatcher) and the short term profits of shareholders. The privitised power industry turned to the cheapest means of generation, natural gas turbines, squandering a limited and valuable asset and leaving us at the mercy of Eastern gas suppliers. They will not invest in expensive long term solutions such as nuclear or renewables. I say re-nationalise power along with care for the elderly and public transport and let the shareholders swivel. This would mean these services are funded and run properly, without the wastfulness of shareholders and other hangers on profiting (management bonuses etc.). They where stolen off the taxpayer in the first place by Thatcher, now it will cost us to get them back.

Elainemary

I contacted Homesun yesterday re free panels. If you'd like to know how I get on let me know.

andycopland

quoia wrote: »

Am I correct that the £65 saved on the bill is purely the difference in the 2 bills for 2009Q2 and 2010Q2 ?
So some of this could (I'm not saying it is) be as a result of a "MILD" Q2 in 2010 but a "rather harsher" Q2 in 2009 reflecting in some part a genuine reduced usage over this period this year ?

Is the further £65 due to meter reversal based on the fact that you saved £65 on your electricity bill AND derived from the concept that you actually USED only 50% of what you generated (as it was being generated) and thus the other 50% was "EXPORTED" sending the meter the wrong way ?

Hi there. To answer your questions, I firstly need to outline the concept of 'deemed' generation. During its FIT consultation process, the Govt realised that domestic export meters would be too costly to install, that there would be insufficient time for anyone to recoup the cost, bearing in mind that they are committed to replacing all existing meters with smartmeters which will do the full job. What they did instead was to come up with the idea of deemed generation as an interim measure. Under deemed generation, I am deemed to have used 50% of my pv generation, and deemed to have sold the other 50% to the supplier. I think most suppliers have adopted this, BG certainly has. It's simply a mathematical compromise to avoid the costs of an export meter.

So, working on the same basis, my figures are constructed as follows

The £65 saved on the bill for Q2 comes from my pv generation in kWh x 50% I have used x nominal cost in pence/unit. In my case that is 991 x 0.5 x .13 = £65

The £65 from the meter running backwards comes from my pv generation x 50% sold x unit cost. That is again 991 x 0.5 x .13 = £65

In my case (with the reversing meter) I have therefore saved £130 on my electricity bill in Q2. When a smartmeter is fitted, it will record the actual amount I have used, which may be greater or smaller than the 50%. When this happens, I'm guessing the savings for an equivalent period would be in the order of £50 to £80.

Hope this helps.

digitaltoast

David_Partington wrote: »

The underlying reason for this is privitisation (by Thatcher)

Ah, of course, it's Thatcher's fault! I mean, she only left office 20 years ago. And Labour couldn't have done anything over the 13 years they had, could they?

David_Partington wrote: »

The privitised power industry turned to the cheapest means of generation, natural gas turbines, squandering a limited and valuable asset and leaving us at the mercy of Eastern gas suppliers.

Perhaps Graham from The Grid can correct either you or me here, but as I understood it, gas turbine was one of the most expensive methods, used only in times of peak demand, because of the cost.

dapri

ade916 wrote: »

I’ve just registered my interest in this. Does anyone know if there is a meter that could be fitted in the circuit that would show how much electricity was coming for the panels etc ????

Cheers
Ade

Hi, all PV systems are installed with a total generation meter - this measures to output of the PV only - this is how the FiT is measured as the FiT is actually (in my humble view) poorly named - it should be called a generation tariff, so regular readings of the total generation meter are required - unless in the future Smart Meters are used which can be read remotely.
Hoope that helps
Regards
Dave:cool: