Solar Panel Guide Discussion

zeupater

Cardew wrote: »

Silly of them not to install it in small systems on roofs around Spain;) - after all when solar farms in UK(rather than small systems) were muted:

... it probably is, but perhaps they simply own a field instead of lots of roof space .....

There's plenty of land in Spain which is well suited for pv and not much else .... anyway there's a pretty simple fact - if they believe that they can finance & build a pv farm without subsidy and they're putting their money into it in order to return a profit, then we have a competitive renewables source of energy within Europe, albeit 1000 miles or so too far south at the moment - that's a distance which is reducing daily as system prices fall .... :cool:

HTH
Z

Martyn1981

Cardew wrote: »

Silly of them not to install it in small systems on roofs around Spain;) - after all when solar farms in UK(rather than small systems) were muted:

Are you suggesting that domestic and commercial installs don't take place in Spain?

Ok, I'm not sure if you really don't understand this, or are just trying to spread confusion and distraction, but I'll give this another go.

Solar farms selling electricity at wholesale prices have harder financial hurdles to clear. But they will have some economies of scale when purchasing the panels and assorted kit.

Domestic and commercial installs sell electricity at wholesale prices and save money at retail prices, and do not face the high annual running costs of a PV farm, so the hurdles are lower.

In Spain it looks like they are on the brink of supply side viability which is the hardest target.

Rather than trying to confuse matters, why won't you simply run some numbers on UK PV farms and see how they stack up. You may be right, I may be wrong (though I'm only suggesting the answers), but at least I'm explaining the issues to you.

Have some more, not only are solar levels higher in Spain, but they are also more consistent and predictable, I'm sure that makes it easier to negotiate sales, than in the UK where supply could vary considerably on a daily basis.

Again (and again, and again) I am not muting you, I am simply the only person left who it appears can be bothered to suggest the problems with UK PV farms, when you raise the issue, which I would guess you have done some 10+ times this year. Why won't you follow your own argument up by running some numbers? It might be interesting.

Mart.

don0301

http://www.solarpowerportal.co.uk/news/feature_reaching_grid_parity_the_uk_solar_story_5478

John_Pierpoint

jimjames wrote: »

Sainsburys are now the largest PV generator in Europe with over 69,000 panels fitted to stores so the cost to them must be worthwhile for their investment

http://uk-solarpanels.blogspot.co.uk/2012/08/sainsburys-biggest-solar-generator.html

So that explains why Morrisons is more profitable?:D

I'm sorry to have missed the mega debate.

PV can be a lifestyle choice at almost any level - Last year I stayed the night at a "farmhouse" on an island in Lake Titicaca
[B&B + EM = £14]. The property: two down and one up plus thunder box privy and separate charcoal powered "kitchen diner" had one visible luxury: PV roof panel powering via a "battery" a Black & White Television - Perhaps it was subsidised so "Big Brother" could keep an eye on the family of mum, dad and 8 children?

Can I just add the I have post card sized PV calculator:
Sharp EL 397 made in Taiwan US patent 3902169 & 3976994.

I have no idea how old it is but it still works, even lit by CFLs !

Note to me and all posters: When using TLAs please define them initially.

PV : PhotoVoltaic
CFL : Compact Flourescent Lamp ?:D

Cardew

Martyn1981 wrote: »

Are you suggesting that domestic and commercial installs don't take place in Spain?

Ok, I'm not sure if you really don't understand this, or are just trying to spread confusion and distraction, but I'll give this another go.

Solar farms selling electricity at wholesale prices have harder financial hurdles to clear. But they will have some economies of scale when purchasing the panels and assorted kit.

Domestic and commercial installs sell electricity at wholesale prices and save money at retail prices, and do not face the high annual running costs of a PV farm, so the hurdles are lower.

In Spain it looks like they are on the brink of supply side viability which is the hardest target.

Rather than trying to confuse matters, why won't you simply run some numbers on UK PV farms and see how they stack up. You may be right, I may be wrong (though I'm only suggesting the answers), but at least I'm explaining the issues to you.

Have some more, not only are solar levels higher in Spain, but they are also more consistent and predictable, I'm sure that makes it easier to negotiate sales, than in the UK where supply could vary considerably on a daily basis.

Again (and again, and again) I am not muting you, I am simply the only person left who it appears can be bothered to suggest the problems with UK PV farms, when you raise the issue, which I would guess you have done some 10+ times this year. Why won't you follow your own argument up by running some numbers? It might be interesting.

Mart.

Let us leave aside the obvious disadvantages of solar PV - which are that it doesn’t generate at night when maximum load on the grid occurs; and that the output during the day is unpredictable because of the weather.

Can we start with some basic points about FIT on which IMO we differ. I repeat this is my understanding!

1. At the end of 2011 the UK had less than 1% of the world’s solar panels. Yet you appear to justify the initial high rate of FIT in 2010 on the grounds that the UK’s adoption of solar was a big factor in world wide lowering of PV panel prices.

I disagree. I contend that prices would have fallen regardless of the UK’s contribution.

2. You then argue that the UK has some moral responsibility to ‘do our bit’ by installing solar.

Whilst I don’t agree with that premise, I have taken the stance that installing panels in solar farms would be a much more efficient way of achieving that aim to ‘do our bit’.

a. The economies of scale are obvious.

b. All of the generated electricity would be exported, unlike systems on individual houses where the understandable aim of occupants is to export as little as possible whilst still being allowed to claim FIT on all electricity generated.

3. As for the figures you request. Well when FIT rates were announced, and <4kWp systems were to get 41.3p/kWp, plenty of organisations/farmers/councils planned to have large systems which would receive a FIT of 20p/kWp. However the Government quickly curtailed those large schemes by reducing FIT to a point where it was not financially viable.

Ironically they allowed Rent a Roof firms to carry on collecting the 41.3p FIT for many thousands of installations. Just one R-A-R firm had over 10,000 x 3.3kWp systems!

4. Your ‘defence’ of sub 4kWp systems, against solar farms, is on a variety of grounds, but mainly they(solar farms) are not financially viable because of their high annual running costs.

Yet the UK government wouldn’t allow solar farms, who were happy to operate with a FIT less than half that of sub 4kWp systems, to receive that subsidy. Any idea why not? Could it be the financiers behind the solar farms were unaware of your concerns, and the Government were simply saving them from financial ruin?

Spain apparently are to construct a solar farm with ‘grid parity’. I was being facetious in suggesting that perhaps they have got it wrong as well, and loads of sub 4kWp systems would be a better proposition.

jimjames

Just to throw another spanner in the works - and no I don't know the answer. The often quoted line is that PV is no use because it doesn't work at night when the peak loading occurs.

Is this actually true? (Obviously not the PV working at night but the peak load being at night!!) Can anyone provide any figures to substantiate it either way?

The reason I ask is that my recollection from a few years ago was power problems during the summer on sunny days as a result of air conditioning use for offices and computer server rooms (for example) that was overloading the grid. If this really was the case then surely PV is a perfect way to help provide this electricity as it will peak at exactly the time that it is needed - sunny days over the summer months.

Martyn1981

Cardew wrote: »

Yet you appear to justify the initial high rate of FIT in 2010 on the grounds that the UK’s adoption of solar was a big factor in world wide lowering of PV panel prices.

I disagree. I contend that prices would have fallen regardless of the UK’s contribution.

Why do you keep making up statements by me, then answering them? You’ve been doing this for 9 months now?

I’ve said that UK FITs has helped with PV prices, as of course it will have. But why do you claim I’ve said it’s a big factor, it would simply be a proportional factor. There’s very little point in you answering claims that you have made up to begin with. I believe I commented a page or so back on your habit of misrepresenting the arguments and points.

As you were recently asked a few times, what do you hope to achieve by this, do you think it goes unmissed?

If the economies of scale are obvious, then do the numbers, let’s have a look. Don’t forget the differing earnings/savings, the land costs, the insurance and security costs, admin, connection fees, and tax on profits.

If you believe that PV farms can hit viability before domestic and commercial, then run some numbers, I keep asking you to. You may be right.

As to the government’s policy on FITs rates, it looks quite logical to me, they are trying to slow things down, to reduce subsidies. A bit like your idea on letting others do it. Like Germany who despite having 20 times our PV, still intend on doubling that amount.

You again attribute statements to me that I haven’t made. I have not said that PV farms are not viable, I’ve said that they have a much higher hurdle to clear, which means that in the UK they may not become viable, or at least not in the short term when domestic and commercial installs look like achieving this feat.

Regarding Spain, I assumed you were being facetious, but given the struggle you have over viability and economics, I could not be certain.

Perhaps the problem between us is not what I type, but what you choose to read.

Mart.

Cardew

Martyn.

If I collect all the comments you have made, and post them here, you will argue that I am quoting them out of context; and we get into a pointless semantic discussion.

The thrust of your many posts has been to justify the high rate FIT for individual sub-4kWp systems and argue against solar farms.

If the economies of scale are obvious, then do the numbers, let’s have a look. Don’t forget the differing earnings/savings, the land costs, the insurance and security costs, admin, connection fees, and tax on profits.

If you believe that PV farms can hit viability before domestic and commercial, then run some numbers, I keep asking you to. You may be right.

I don't have to 'do the numbers' when plenty of organisations were prepared set up large solar installations and receive a FIT of less than half that given to householders and Rent a Roof companies; or do you feel they hadn't 'done the numbers'?

Despite your jibe at my struggle with economics, it doesn't take the brains of an Archbishop to appreciate that if a subsidy of less than half the sub-4kWp is given, you can get twice the amount of panels for the same amount of subsidy.

You totally ignore the fact that systems on houses only export a percentage of their generation(and understandably spend a lot of effort to make that percentage as low as possible). Solar farms will export virtually all of their generation.

The people behind the proposed grid viable solar farm in Spain have also presumably managed to 'do the numbers'.

ronlizpatsimon

Good afternoon "jimjames"
Earlier you queried consumption by day compared with night.
This must be a highly personal thing; dependent on several factors such as what equipment you have, and when you have to use it.
Personally, being retired, I can use heavy usage items during daylight (water heating, dishwasher, clothes-washer and ironing). The normal main use after dark is the more modest consumption of the TV and a few low energy bulbs. I can use Gas for central heating if needed. The cost of buying electricity is £32 per month (3 bed-roomed detached dormer bungalow)

Cardew

jimjames wrote: »

Just to throw another spanner in the works - and no I don't know the answer. The often quoted line is that PV is no use because it doesn't work at night when the peak loading occurs.

Is this actually true? (Obviously not the PV working at night but the peak load being at night!!) Can anyone provide any figures to substantiate it either way?

The reason I ask is that my recollection from a few years ago was power problems during the summer on sunny days as a result of air conditioning use for offices and computer server rooms (for example) that was overloading the grid. If this really was the case then surely PV is a perfect way to help provide this electricity as it will peak at exactly the time that it is needed - sunny days over the summer months.

There are many National Grid statistics available - just Google 'National Grid Peak load' that confirm that the peak load is on an early winter's evening.

The current peak load occurs on a typical winter
day in early evening. In 2002, the average winter
peak was 51 GW (Figure 8.5), from an installed
capacity of approximately 77 GW; the 25% excess
capacity covering plant unavailability
(maintenance, failure etc). This was sufficient to
meet the maximum recorded UK peak of 61.7 GW

in 2002 (DTI 2004a)

In parts of Southern USA the peak load can be due to the high demand of Air conditioning. In Florida householders can get payment for allowing their Aircon and other heavy consumption appliances to be switched off remotely for up to 20 minutes, in order to share load.