Free solar panel discussion

SWH

grahamc2003 wrote: »

So it's no surprise to me that contracts are being changed for new signups. (I don't think they can nunilaterally change them for existing contracts though, perhaps a lawyer could comment?)

A lawyer comment would be appreciated. I'm meeting up with an old school friend on Friday, who happens to be a lawyer...so I might slip the question into the conversation unless someone on here can help?

That is quite a burden to take on just to gain less than £100 of 'free' electricity pa - the scale of the risk seems out of kilter to the tiny financial benefit imv.

My thoughts exactly...I liked the option to buy out and take on FITS down the line when my finances were more able to cover it (one 2yr old at moment, second baby due in a few weeks so not really got enough freedom to invest myself at the moment) But as soon as they said future FITS to be included in buy out it didn't make financial sense. Give me some of the FITS payment and I might be swayed...call it rent, rather than the peppercorn per year.

I think the tiny financial benefit of this 'free' electricity really gets blown out of all proportion in peoples' minds sometimes - it's less than a tankful of petrol for many people).

At least it'd make running my car a bit cheaper each year

John_Pierpoint

I an given to understand, but I might be wrong, that the local council in Birmingham is putting panels on the roofs of its council homes.
The tenant gets to keep "up to £150" and the council will get the FiT.
Or share of the FiT?

digitaltoast

John_Pierpoint wrote: »

I an given to understand, but I might be wrong, that the local council in Birmingham is putting panels on the roofs of its council homes.
The tenant gets to keep "up to £150" and the council will get the FiT.
Or share of the FiT?

AHA! I should know about this

The BBC covered it just this week in their aptly named Costing The Earth:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b0100grj

The spokesdroid from Birmingham spectacularly failed to answer a number of questions, and when I phoned Birmingham to ask them to send me their cost/benefit calculations, I hit brick wall after brick wall.

So just last night I finished a FOI request to them, which will be in the post, recorded delivery, this very afternoon!

They're not going to like it though - one of the questions is:
"According to your calculations, by how much each year do you expect this scheme to increase fuel poverty for those elderly residents not able to participate?"

There are 15 questions in all, regarding calculations on cost-benefit ratio, maintenance, contract costs, alternatives considered including heat pumps (average 250% efficient vs 8% efficient for solar PV), complete embodied/lifecycle carbon emissions, expected solar insolation vs manufacturers rated ouput, insurance, performance guarantees ... you get the idea!

When I get a reply, I'll post a copy of my letter and their reply on my blog

Elainemary

Well, in my case, " not to solar ". I've ended up more confused than ever as this thread wanders off in to byways having very little to do with " Free Solar Panels " - the original purpose, I believe.
I'm getting all new double glazed windows put in instead which will make me waterproof and wind proof for the foreseeable future ( I hope! )
I'm sure I'll carry on reading this thread just to see what happens. Good luck to you whether you get " freebies " or pay for them.:

zeupater

Elainemary wrote: »

Well, in my case, " not to solar ". I've ended up more confused than ever as this thread wanders off in to byways having very little to do with " Free Solar Panels " - the original purpose, I believe.
I'm getting all new double glazed windows put in instead which will make me waterproof and wind proof for the foreseeable future ( I hope! )
I'm sure I'll carry on reading this thread just to see what happens. Good luck to you whether you get " freebies " or pay for them.:

Hi

If you're paying for the glass in the walls, why would you not pay for the glass on the roof and want a 'rent-a-roof' system ?? ..... the income from owning the glass on the roof would likely pay for your glass in the walls, but the glass in the walls is effectively dead money ... makes no sense to me.

HTH
Z

digitaltoast

zeupater wrote: »

If you're paying for the glass in the walls, why would you not pay for the glass on the roof and want a 'rent-a-roof' system ?? ..... the income from owning the glass on the roof would likely pay for your glass in the walls, but the glass in the walls is effectively dead money ... makes no sense to me.

Because the glass in the walls will make your home warmer, quieter, more secure and will increase the value of the house.

The glass on the roof will certainly provide an income ... for the company which gets the guaranteed £800 per year. If extremely lucky, the homeowner may get or save "as much as £100" per year (at best).

That is, until the company providing the panels voluntarily liquidates itself and restarts the next day under a different trading name to avoid maintenance guarantees. At which point the homeowner becomes liable for new inverters which will be needed between every 5 and 15 years, or they want to move in that 25 years requiring a costly buyout if they can't find a buyer who wants to take on the contract.

But yes, if a massively inefficient con-trick in the form of a reverse Robin Hood tax moving money from the poor to the lucky makes sense for you, then go for it.

Cardew

digitaltoast wrote: »

Because the glass in the walls will make your home warmer, quieter, more secure and will increase the value of the house.

The glass on the roof will certainly provide an income ... for the company which gets the guaranteed £800 per year. If extremely lucky, the homeowner may get or save "as much as £100" per year (at best).

.

I think you have misunderstood zeupater.

As I read his post, he thinks it makes more sense to buy(not rent) a solar PV system rather than spend the money initially on Double Glazing. The income fro PV will pay for DG!!

zeupater

digitaltoast wrote: »

Because the glass in the walls will make your home warmer, quieter, more secure and will increase the value of the house.

The glass on the roof will certainly provide an income ... for the company which gets the guaranteed £800 per year. If extremely lucky, the homeowner may get or save "as much as £100" per year (at best).

That is, until the company providing the panels voluntarily liquidates itself and restarts the next day under a different trading name to avoid maintenance guarantees. At which point the homeowner becomes liable for new inverters which will be needed between every 5 and 15 years, or they want to move in that 25 years requiring a costly buyout if they can't find a buyer who wants to take on the contract.

But yes, if a massively inefficient con-trick in the form of a reverse Robin Hood tax moving money from the poor to the lucky makes sense for you, then go for it.

Hi

I think you've misread and/or misunderstood the point raised in my post ....

Z

## Edit .... Cardew is correct, that's exactly my point.

Cardew

Great minds etc!!!

digitaltoast

Cardew wrote: »

I think you have misunderstood zeupater.

As I read his post, he thinks it makes more sense to buy(not rent) a solar PV system rather than spend the money initially on Double Glazing. The income fro PV will pay for DG!!

Ah, yes. I sort of almost half thought that as I read it, but then read it the other way, if that makes sense. I'll shut up now and go out...