Free solar panel discussion

digitaltoast

Nang wrote: »

Surely excess supply on the grid would have been an advantage.

Nope, still no go. Excess supply leads to over-frequency and over-voltage. At which point a generator is forced to "drop off", the financial penalty for which is fairly high, which includes the long re-start cycle.

Have a look at this gauge and read the stuff below:

http://www.dynamicdemand.co.uk/grid.htm

Not wanting to sound patronising or anything, but you appear to be missing some very basic fundamentals about how the grid and electricity works. I've posted some links to FAQs and stuff above. Do take the time to read them, it's fairly essential to being able to follow the arguments for and against any form of generation.

Not sure if they still do them, but large power stations used to do trips round them. I've toured Didcot (coal), Sizewell (Nuclear), Hoover Dam in the USA (hydro), one of the world's largest wind turbine farms near Palm Springs (USA) and a geothermal facility in New Zealand, and I got the pics to prove it too (except Sizewell, no cameras!).

So, with that an my two years at The Grid, I think I might just have picked up a little knowledge about the subject...

Equaliser123

digitaltoast wrote: »

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TV_pickup


Can you tell me how much sunshine those PVs are "soaking up" and many watts you expect them to be producing at 21:00?

Muppet. They only work during the day.

Don't they teach people anything these days?

digitaltoast

Equaliser123 wrote: »

Muppet. They only work during the day.

Don't they teach people anything these days?

Yeah, that was my point. So, you have a go at me for being calling one person something, but you then go and call them a "muppet" because you assume they don't know that PV doesn't work at night?

Hypocrite much?

Elainemary

Delerium wrote: »

Brummy's exactly right. With my array, im looking at an estimated profit of £31,000 over 25 years. But the generation i have is on a perfect 30 degree array south facing with no shading. And all the figures are estimates based on weather. (Before anyone says 31k is not achievable, if you take into account inflation, price rises and reinvesting income from FITS, it perfectly is)

So in summary, yeah its all down to individual circumstances. For me, its a very beneficial investment due to my location, and circumstances. For the next guy, it might not be by a long shot.

My advice is just get a survey from one or two suppliers and see what they have to say and run it by a few people here to see if its sounding reasonable (we arent qualified experts but we should be able to spot if someones taking you for a ride).

Del

Is it a trade secret or can you let us all know where you live? You just say " Due to my location ", but don't give an area, so we're all left guessing where it is.:)

Elainemary

Children, children!! Can we PLEASE return to reasoned argument instead of all the namecalling that's been going on? Thank you.:eek:

zeupater

Elainemary wrote: »

Is it a trade secret or can you let us all know where you live? You just say " Due to my location ", but don't give an area, so we're all left guessing where it is.:)

Hi

I may be wrong, but I'd read south coast(ish) & high rate taxpayer as being the meaning behind what was posted ....

Z

Cardew

Nang wrote: »

So in the spirit of remaining constructive, and keeping in mind that we (in "we" I mean the UK) have to meet green energy production targets or deal with the fines for not doing so.

What OYO is a realistic alternative?

Well if we are to have solar PV(a bad idea at our latitude anyway) then place huge arrays on the roofs of supermarkets, factories, industrial sites in SW England and S England, even fields.

Economy of scale, simple mounting on racks, ease of cleaning and maintenance. This is in Germany.



Instead we allow firms like ASG to place 10 to 20 panels on thousands of roofs and pay them huge subsidies, clearly are intended for individuals, that we pay for in increased electricity charges. All the profits going to venture capitalists.

Just in case anyone isn't aware, really huge installations don't attract the silly level of subsidy.

Delerium_2

Elainemary wrote: »

Is it a trade secret or can you let us all know where you live? You just say " Due to my location ", but don't give an area, so we're all left guessing where it is.:)

Not at all. Warrington in Cheshire.

Del

grahamc2003

Nang wrote: »

Un-educated, and ignorant eh?

Its true I did not quite get to PHD level, but you would be amazed at how much I learn every day from arrogant, condescending folk on web forums.

Is every night a freezing cold winter night then? Perhaps in your world, yes.

BTW. You still have not added one constructive point on this debate. I wait in anticipation.

It's strange isn't it? Those who have declared their hand as being either a chartered engineer, or have worked for NGC, or both (and I'll declare mine - I did get to PhD level, sponsored, in fact, by cerl, the research labs of the cegb, and then went to work for many years in senior engineering positions for the NGC) seem unanimously opposed to solar PV panels and these 'free' UK schemes(along with Monbiot too - a turn up for the books there!).

Why should it come about that those trained in engineering and/or NGC experienced all come to the same conclusion? Is it a consiparcy, or is there something fundamentally wrong in subsidising inefficient generation?

Are the solar supporters seeing something those who should know the ins and outs of solar and its effect on the grid aren't?

I must say, some of the pro posts are along the lines of 'I can get all my daytime electricity for nowt' and that appears to be all the (incorrect) analysis necessary to convince them it's a great idea.

Engineers will always look at the total effects of any system, and make a judgement on that. Imo, the total effects of solar involve a massive waste of resources which would be much better (an order of magnitude better) deployed elsewhere.

Nang

Cardew wrote: »

Well if we are to have solar PV(a bad idea at our latitude anyway) then place huge arrays on the roofs of supermarkets, factories, industrial sites in SW England and S England, even fields.

Economy of scale, simple mounting on racks, ease of cleaning and maintenance. This is in Germany.



Instead we allow firms like ASG to place 10 to 20 panels on thousands of roofs and pay them huge subsidies, clearly are intended for individuals, that we pay for in increased electricity charges. All the profits going to venture capitalists.

Just in case anyone isn't aware, really huge installations don't attract the silly level of subsidy.

Great thanks, that's what I was fishing for

Its a nice idea, and I think it looks nice too (might be on my own here though).

I reckon the problem would be getting any individual (or group of) to stump up for it. With the "I am making my own electric hook" you have a very attractive pitch to a purchaser. Also wouldn't we still have the issue described earlier where the grid could not cope with the unpredictable nature of the generation? Sounds from earlier posts like the current infrastructure (national grid) doesn't support the technology. This would appear to me to be the biggest hurdle.

Can you infrastructure be changed to suit the technology? or are we stuck with it?