Free solar panel discussion

slacky555

BrummyGit wrote: »

From what I've read it's nothing to worry about if you are now exporting energy from your Solar PV out to the grid. It sounds like its present on recent meters - my understanding is that it simply indicates that you have exported power.

From memory you have a similar system to me. Your supplier will have registered your address for export of power and I understand that that initially they use an estimate of the power you export (if memory serves me correctly they use 50% of generation based on your generation readings). Eventually someone will want to swap your home meter for an import/export meter for more accurate data.

All of this information is based on what I've read online and therefore given in good faith.

Cheers sort of what I had read. Think I will give them a call tomorrow as it is the first time I have seen it since having the panels and I know it isn't my best generating day today since having them so don't know why it had happened today and not before.

Nang

slacky555 wrote: »

Just a quick question I know this isn't the right thread but I hope you may have come across this.

I have a landis electric meter and now it shows a message "rED" reading up on this has it got a fault? Or is it due to the solar panels and is it a fault that will go?

Hi Slacky

I can definitely help here.

I had the same problem when I got my panels installed last July. The failing meter was less than a year old but it was still incompatible with Micro gen. I phoned up NPower and they sent an engineer round to change the meter. I now have one with a picture of a ratchet on it i.e the meter cannot go backwards.

Every thing works fine now. Hope this helps.

Nang

digitaltoast wrote: »

As for "doing the sums", how about these?

http://lowcarbonkid.blogspot.com/2010/03/does-pv-solar-electricity-work-in-uk.html

Keeping in mind that I appreciate the argument for solar power in the UK doesn't really stand up under scrutiny (and looking out at the mist today doesn't do a lot to change that.):)

I've been reviewing the arguments against and found some are quite confusing too. For instance I have been reading the link above and I am struggling for clarity.

In part of it the blogger says:-

In darkest December they were generating just 125W, or enough to power 10 low energy light bulbs. In fact it might be even less than this, because of shading, downtime and other system inefficiencies.

What does he mean by in December, is this an average all through December (total output in Kwh / 31 days)? For me that would be about 3 kwh.

Or does he mean the highest output the panels could ever give in December is 125 watts? If so, that's way out too, there were times in December when my array managed 2.5 KW (and I live in Sheffield).

It might be some kind of average figure all through the month, but would that include the night time too, and how would that relate to the manufactures peak estimates?

He goes on to say that a 25.4 KWhP system installed in London had a payback of 237 years, not sure I get that either.

Lets say we take Max's array on my site (cos it has the most figures, almost a year), and took away the FITS and just paid him 11 pence (typical figure) for what he generated / used.

He's likely to make about 3310 KWh this year , which equates to :- 3310 * 0.11 = £364.

For argument sake lets take this as a typical year.

he paid £17,220 for his array (keeping in mind he was an early adopter and would be cheaper now).

17,220 / 364 = 47 years. I agree its not exactly great, but somewhat better than 237 years, this blogger quotes.

Would love to hear any comments folk have on this. I know some folk feel really strongly about this subject, but would really appreciate if we could keep comments, civil and constructive this time.

jackieblack

I would read that to mean that on some given day in December the panels were generating 125W at that moment.

Nang

jackieblack wrote: »

I would read that to mean that on some given day in December the panels were generating 125W at that moment.

I would think that's just too random though to be used in a compelling argument. I mean you would have to state a time too, mid day for instance, otherwise it's kind of meaningless.

If you see what I mean?

And the way he says right after that quote:-

In fact it might be even less than this, because of shading, downtime and other system inefficiencies.

Makes it sound more like some kind of average.

slacky555

Nang wrote: »

Hi Slacky

I can definitely help here.

I had the same problem when I got my panels installed last July. The failing meter was less than a year old but it was still incompatible with Micro gen. I phoned up NPower and they sent an engineer round to change the meter. I now have one with a picture of a ratchet on it i.e the meter cannot go backwards.

Every thing works fine now. Hope this helps.

Oh right but my meter now doesn't go backwards! I have called them and they are sending out a engineer next tue to check it and probably change it a you say.

Not really fussed what they do as I haven't got a backwards spinning meter now anyway.

Nang

slacky555 wrote: »

Oh right but my meter now doesn't go backwards! I have called them and they are sending out a engineer next tue to check it and probably change it a you say.

Not really fussed what they do as I haven't got a backwards spinning meter now anyway.

Sorry I should have been clearer.

They replaced it with one of the old types of meters with the non digital display, but apparently in some cases the old meters can run backwards (not a bad thing you might argue). So they have to check it has a picture of a ratchet on it (the meter), and then it won't go backward when you are supplying power back.

slacky555

Nang wrote: »

Sorry I should have been clearer.

They replaced it with one of the old types of meters with the non digital display, but apparently in some cases the old meters can run backwards (not a bad thing you might argue). So they have to check it has a picture of a ratchet on it (the meter), and then it won't go backward when you are supplying power back.

Got you now, we will see why they do guess it must be a problem for a lot of people. Will keep you all updated.

Cardew

Nang wrote: »

Lets say we take Max's array on my site (cos it has the most figures, almost a year), and took away the FITS and just paid him 11 pence (typical figure) for what he generated / used.

He's likely to make about 3310 KWh this year , which equates to :- 3310 * 0.11 = £364.

For argument sake lets take this as a typical year.

he paid £17,220 for his array (keeping in mind he was an early adopter and would be cheaper now).

17,220 / 364 = 47 years. I agree its not exactly great, but somewhat better than 237 years, this blogger quotes.

Would love to hear any comments folk have on this.

'Payback' is not that simple I am afraid Nang.

Max paid £17,720 for his array. He could have invested that in a long term Building Society account at 5%(4% after tax). So in the first year he would make £708.80 in interest. The next year £737.15 etc etc. So he will lose about £700 over 2 years and his 'losses will be ever greater year on year.

Even with FITs you have to go through the same process to calculate time to payback.

Obviously that figure can only be an estimate as we don't know future inflation and interest rates, cost of maintenance and the possibility of future Governments messing about with FITs.

I think most estimates were for about a 12 Year payback, although this might be a bit less since prices have reduced.

Nang

Cardew wrote: »

'Payback' is not that simple I am afraid Nang.

Max paid £17,720 for his array. He could have invested that in a long term Building Society account at 5%(4% after tax). So in the first year he would make £708.80 in interest. The next year £737.15 etc etc. So he will lose about £700 over 2 years and his 'losses will be ever greater year on year.

Even with FITs you have to go through the same process to calculate time to payback.

Obviously that figure can only be an estimate as we don't know future inflation and interest rates, cost of maintenance and the possibility of future Governments messing about with FITs.

I think most estimates were for about a 12 Year payback, although this might be a bit less since prices have reduced.

Thanks Cards

You meant £17,220, right?

You are right of course, I haven't factored this in to my very basic calculations, and i guess to be realistic you also need to include in the calcs the price of about 3-4 invertors. But I was just using it one example to point out how unreliable this source is as the basis of an argument.

and there more, take a look at this:-

System Size :- 25.4 KWp

Annual Output:- 11.8 MWH

That means the system he's used in the example generates 11,800,000 KWh per year for a 25.4 KWp array, i.e 464,567 KWh / year for each 1 KWp. Mine is estimated at about 833.

If I had those solar panels installed, I could have cleaned up all the fits budget last summer, by myself.