Free solar panel discussion

Henbest

YulBrynner wrote: »

My earlier post predicted that FIT's could be scrapped at any time due to the German governments disastrous experience with solar panels. Today I read this... InsideHousing.co.uk/sustainability/feed-in-tariffs-should-be-scrapped/6510993.article
So the discussion has already started and don't think for one minute that the renewable heat incentive scheme will be exempt from scrutiny.

Haveing always watched and followed the German experiance of FIT, the German government is now implimenting cuts to its tariff having been paying out €45 billion a year in subsidies.
One of the reasons their is a shortage of grid tie inverters is that the Germans signed up to the tariff before the cuts were made, thus increasing demand.
In a German publication called Sun and Wind, where I read about the cost to the German government, they are now looking into the manufactures of PV panels, mainly those of Chinese and USA where the disposal of many different Toxic materials used in the process from the raw silicone to the completed moduels after it was found the a river near a village and school in China had been used as a dumping ground for 9 months until some body sounded the alarm bells.

grahamc2003

Jon_Tiffany wrote: »

You are now making it even worse. How much council tax will be used to fund the scheme? How much VAT on a gas bill for heating? How much insurance tax will be used? Zero.

Yes you are correct that most people pay some form of tax. Most people when refering to taxpayer money mean that which is paid to central government.

Here are some sums to show the cost to a domestic electicity bill payer.

I'd say everyone pays tax, therefore everyone is a taxpayer, therefore it's taxpayers who pay for the subsidy (since electricity consumers are all taxpayers). Sorry I doubted DigitalToast before - he's perfectly correct.

You've missed out some of the costs passed onto consumers in their electricity bills.

The admin system for a start. There'll be a bunch of very highly paid consultants at this moment developing a system for payments, checking, authorising, fraud checking, and loads of other factors necessary for the admin system. Probably a government contract, so lots of very expensive bums on seats dreaming up even more expensive complexities in the system. Good for quite a few tens of million I'd guess as the senior consultants run up business in their quest to become a partner.

Then there's the ongoing running costs. Not much idea about this, but it's a government green initiative, so plenty of cash thrown it's way I'd expect. It's not beyond a possibility that the admin costs would be around the same as the FIT payments going through the system.

Jon_Tiffany

digitaltoast wrote: »

VAT from any source goes to central government.
Council tax doesn't go directly to empty your bins, it goes to central government.
Road tax isn't for the roads. It goes to central government.
National Insurance isn't for hospitals or pensions...guess where?
The big pool of central government again.

Where are you getting that 50% from? Do you think businesses won't pass the increase on (bearing in mind they pay a higher level of VAT)?

Again, taking it back to basics: a kilowatt hour of electricity costs between 4 and 8p to generate normally. It is sold to the end user for around 12p. And it costs 41p to buy from people who are generating it via PV. It's still sold at 12p. Where do you think the difference between the buy price of 41p and the sell price of 11p is going to come from? And if not taxpayers, who?

The FIT payments do NOT come from the council tax, road tax, NI etc. Not single penny of that money that goes to central government (or local councils) is used to make FIT payments.

I'll explain one more time about where the money comes from, it comes from the energy companies, who in turn will pass the cost on the end consumers - anyone who pays an electric bill. The energy companies are not funded by central government money!

See my sums in the earlier post - it will cost each household (not person) £2.74 a year.

The 50% figure is an assumption, as stated in the earlier post. If you have a more accurate figure then please feel free to share. The assumption is that comericial users account for around 50% of the electricity use in the UK and will therefore pick up 50% of the cost.

Even if you ignore the 50%, its still only £5.48 per year.

Pincher

Jon_Tiffany wrote: »

Be aware that if they protude above the ridge line you may need planning permission.

Thanks for the reminder, but all three dormers are at the back of the house, and are comfortably below the ridge line.

The old hot water cylinder is right below the solar panel position,
so it's perfect location for a solar thermal panel. By the look of things photovoltaic is not worthwhile for the area available.

Henbest

Can sombody in this forum confirm the following:

If during the day while the familiy are at work and kids at school in say the 6 months of summer, the only electricty demand is from the AA rated energy efficent fridge consuming 300 watts an hr.
Nothing in my house is left on standby.
My 2.5kWh PV system on a clear blue sky day during peak hrs is genarating 2kW, either side of peak hrs 50% less at 1 kW giving a total days genaration of 9,000 watts?

In the six hours my fridge has used 1,800 watts which pays me £0.41.3 p a kWh.
The balance of electricty genarated goes to the Utility and pays out £0.3p per kWh.
Is this about right?

In winter months where peak hrs of sun light with be around 2 hrs and subject to the angle of the flat panels, wuth the sun not rising until 8am and going down at 4pm, what amount of the FIT can be expected with rising levels of genaration as the sun rises earler and sets later.

For an extra £2,000 on top of the supply and fit of the PV panels, I have worked out that I could gain 100% from all the electricty genarated throughout the year and use that electricty outside sunshine hrs.

digitaltoast

Jon_Tiffany wrote: »

The FIT payments do NOT come from the council tax, road tax, NI etc. Not single penny of that money that goes to central government (or local councils) is used to make FIT payments.

But that's not what I said. I said it's taxpayers that will be paying for it*.
You can split hairs and argue about a theoretical person who has somehow managed to live in such a way that they pay zero tax while enjoying full healthcare and government benefits ("travellers", I think they're called), but when it comes down to it you know your argument is dancing on the head of a pin over semantics.

As I say, everyone from the smallest to the biggest business knows that you can't make a viable business out of selling something for over a third less than you paid for it. The money has to come from somewhere - if not taxpayers via their electricity bills, then who?

*edit: and as Graham said in a post as I was typing, it's a government administered scheme. You can only begin to image the huge waste that'll involve. Was it £27 BILLION the government wrote off in failed IT projects last year?

Jon_Tiffany

grahamc2003 wrote: »

I'd say everyone pays tax, therefore everyone is a taxpayer, therefore it's taxpayers who pay for the subsidy (since electricity consumers are all taxpayers). Sorry I doubted DigitalToast before - he's perfectly correct.

You've missed out some of the costs passed onto consumers in their electricity bills.

The admin system for a start. There'll be a bunch of very highly paid consultants at this moment developing a system for payments, checking, authorising, fraud checking, and loads of other factors necessary for the admin system. Probably a government contract, so lots of very expensive bums on seats dreaming up even more expensive complexities in the system. Good for quite a few tens of million I'd guess as the senior consultants run up business in their quest to become a partner.

Then there's the ongoing running costs. Not much idea about this, but it's a government green initiative, so plenty of cash thrown it's way I'd expect. It's not beyond a possibility that the admin costs would be around the same as the FIT payments going through the system.

I factored in 5% for admin costs.

The payments are made by the energy companies. How many times to I have to say it? The energy companies are responsible for the admin and the costs.

There is one government cost that I have missed - the MCS database and Ofgem who will maintain a database of the installations.

Jon_Tiffany

digitaltoast wrote: »

But that's not what I said. I said it's taxpayers that will be paying for it.
You can split hairs and argue about a theoretical person who has somehow managed to live in such a way that they pay zero tax while enjoying full healthcare and government benefits ("travellers", I think they're called), but when it comes down to it you know your argument is dancing on the head of a pin over semantics.

As I say, everyone from the smallest to the biggest business knows that you can't make a viable business out of selling something for over a third less than you paid for it. The money has to come from somewhere - if not taxpayers via their electricity bills, then who?

One more time, from my earlier post:

I'll explain one more time about where the money comes from, it comes from the energy companies, who in turn will pass the cost on the end consumers - anyone who pays an electric bill (including business users). The energy companies are not funded by central government money!

You are trying to imply that it is funded by council tax etc - that is just plain wrong.

Jon_Tiffany

Jon_Tiffany wrote: »

I factored in 5% for admin costs.

There is one government cost that I have missed - the MCS database and Ofgem who will maintain a database of the installations.

Opps - my mistake, Ofgem is also funded by the energy companies.

I'm unsure how MCS is funded.

Jon_Tiffany

Henbest wrote: »

Can sombody in this forum confirm the following:

If during the day while the familiy are at work and kids at school in say the 6 months of summer, the only electricty demand is from the AA rated energy efficent fridge consuming 300 watts an hr.
Nothing in my house is left on standby.
My 2.5kWh PV system on a clear blue sky day during peak hrs is genarating 2kW, either side of peak hrs 50% less at 1 kW giving a total days genaration of 9,000 watts?

In the six hours my fridge has used 1,800 watts which pays me £0.41.3 p a kWh.
The balance of electricty genarated goes to the Utility and pays out £0.3p per kWh.
Is this about right?

In winter months where peak hrs of sun light with be around 2 hrs and subject to the angle of the flat panels, wuth the sun not rising until 8am and going down at 4pm, what amount of the FIT can be expected with rising levels of genaration as the sun rises earler and sets later.

For an extra £2,000 on top of the supply and fit of the PV panels, I have worked out that I could gain 100% from all the electricty genarated throughout the year and use that electricty outside sunshine hrs.

You will never use 100% of the generated electricity, there will always be some that is exported.

You get paid the £0.413 for every kWh you generate, not what you use.