FITs warning!

PeterZ_2

grahamc2003 wrote: »

Yes, and what is strange that many of the supporters who have a 'free' system seem to think they benefit financially, through 'free' electricity, via these schemes. (I think that is their sole reason for support!).

But a back of fag packet calculation shows that even they actually lose out financially - the extra costs on their bill to support this scheme and numerous others like it, exceeding the small benefit of the 'free' electricity they use.

Could you show your working for this? I think your calculations may be a little off.

My understanding is that FITs will add around £8 a year to bills. Lets say typical annual savings are a rather modest £100 then surely you would be £92 a year better off?

I also agree that stopping the big solar farms is the correct thing to do. While I am very much in favour of renewables due the energy crunch we face, covering farm land is not the way to go. There must be thousands of acres of warehouses that can be covered instead.

grahamc2003

PeterZ wrote: »

Could you show your working for this? I think your calculations may be a little off.

My understanding is that FITs will add around £8 a year to bills. Lets say typical annual savings are a rather modest £100 then surely you would be £92 a year better off?

I also agree that stopping the big solar farms is the correct thing to do. While I am very much in favour of renewables due the energy crunch we face, covering farm land is not the way to go. There must be thousands of acres of warehouses that can be covered instead.

The maths are quite simple - bgas told me that, last year, 7% of my bill went for 'environmental' initiatives - which are fits and other similar subsidies. Taking the average bill as £1k (this is bag of fag packet as I said, not perfectly accurate stuff), that equals £70 last year. (These subsidies are rising each year, and I read somewhere or other that they will, in a decade's time, soon comprise 50% of our bills).

So say the average loading on our bills this year is say £80.

The benefit oif the 'free' electricity to a 'free' panel leaseholder is up for debate, but I'd say the average leaseholder wouldn't manage £80 of savings (from evidence posted on these boards from those few with export meters).

Hence my conclusion that even free panel leaseholders lose out financially.

(I note you are simply considering the costs of the fit, whereas my estimation, as I clearly stated, was on the costs of the fit plus other similar 'green' subsidies).

The ones who do gain from these 'free' systems are the panel owners, who typically get something like 10 times the benefit of the leaseholder, and don't have any increased bills to offset that gain.

keith_r59

grahamc2003 wrote: »

The maths are quite simple - bgas told me that, last year, 7% of my bill went for 'environmental' initiatives - which are fits and other similar subsidies. Taking the average bill as £1k (this is bag of fag packet as I said, not perfectly accurate stuff), that equals £70 last year. (These subsidies are rising each year, and I read somewhere or other that they will, in a decade's time, soon comprise 50% of our bills).

So say the average loading on our bills this year is say £80.

The benefit oif the 'free' electricity to a 'free' panel leaseholder is up for debate, but I'd say the average leaseholder wouldn't manage £80 of savings (from evidence posted on these boards from those few with export meters).

Hence my conclusion that even free panel leaseholders lose out financially.

(I note you are simply considering the costs of the fit, whereas my estimation, as I clearly stated, was on the costs of the fit plus other similar 'green' subsidies).

The ones who do gain from these 'free' systems are the panel owners, who typically get something like 10 times the benefit of the leaseholder, and don't have any increased bills to offset that gain.

As I said in an earlier post, people have to pay this subsidy whether they have panels installed or not so by taking advantage of the "free" solar pv system they will still save money.

For interest, uSwitch have produced a breakdown of the average energy bill - gas and electric.

http://www.uswitch.com/gas-electricity/average-energy-bills/

I don't think anyone disagrees with you that the main benefactor of these "rent-a-roof" systems are the companies who install them but then they are the ones who are taking all the risk with their investment. Now whether they should legally be allowed to do this is another question altogether and one which has been discussed in length on these boards already.

grahamc2003

keith_r59 wrote: »

As I said in an earlier post, people have to pay this subsidy whether they have panels installed or not so by taking advantage of the "free" solar pv system they will still save money.

For interest, uSwitch have produced a breakdown of the average energy bill - gas and electric.

http://www.uswitch.com/gas-electricity/average-energy-bills/

I.

Thanks for ther uswitch info. It looks like the 'green' costs on bills are now 10% according to them.

I suppose whether those with free panels gain or lose overall is down to semantics.

I feel if they get £70 of 'free' electricity, but their bills are increased by £100 (uswicth), then I would look upon that as them losing out £30 overall. You appear to want to stop your analysis at the £70 benefit, which I suppose is up to you, but it seems strange to simply ignore the bill loading these schemes involve to arrive at a net gain or loss due to the systems. Just because those without the free panels lose out £100 pa doesn't alter any of the facts for those with them (which I think is related to the point you are trying to make)

Anyhow, I think it's clear we all understand the numbers involved, the money in and the money out, and it just comes down to how we wish to view those numbers.

Cardew

grahamc2003 wrote: »

Thanks for ther uswitch info. It looks like the 'green' costs on bills are now 10% according to them.

I suppose whether those with free panels gain or lose overall is down to semantics.

I feel if they get £70 of 'free' electricity, but their bills are increased by £100 (uswicth), then I would look upon that as them losing out £30 overall. You appear to want to stop your analysis at the £70 benefit, which I suppose is up to you, but it seems strange to simply ignore the bill loading these schemes involve to arrive at a net gain or loss due to the systems. Just because those without the free panels lose out £100 pa doesn't alter any of the facts for those with them (which I think is related to the point you are trying to make)

Anyhow, I think it's clear we all understand the numbers involved, the money in and the money out, and it just comes down to how we wish to view those numbers.

The way I read it is that the 10% is only on the electricity bill; so the £100 applies only if you have a £1,000 electricity bill.

However we are all going to pay that 10% regardless of having PV panels on your roof or bird poo!

penrhyn

Guano? Theres a thought.

zeupater

penrhyn wrote: »

Guano? Theres a thought.

Probably about a third that of diesel before anyone asks ....

keith_r59

grahamc2003 wrote: »

I suppose whether those with free panels gain or lose overall is down to semantics.

No, it's down to basic arithmetic. Have no panels on your roof and you save £0 on your electricity bills but you still pay the 10% environmental subsidy.

Have some panels on your roof and you save £n dependent on your electricity usage and you still pay the 10% environmental subsidy albeit on lower electricity bills.

The only debate is how much you save - 10%, 20%, 50% etc. off your electricity bills - but you will definitely save money by having the "free" panels installed.

penrhyn

No, the debate is why the vast majority of consumers should be subsidising middle class ecobling vanity projects ( and the cowboys exploiting loopholes in the regulations)
They will not make an atom of difference to the countries reliance on fossil fuels, guess what guys, most of us heat our homes with gas.

davehills

Personally, I'll be waiting for the prices to drop, then look at buying some.