Solar Panel Guide Discussion

keith_r59

orrery wrote: »

But it may take time to get your money back (as we found out recently) - hence, as I said, the risk is very low but isn't zero.

The FSCS will aim to pay compensation in the majority of cases within seven days of a bank, building society or credit union failing. Any remaining claims, which are likely to be more complex, will be paid within 20 working days

http://www.fscs.org.uk/your-claim/how-long-will-it-take/

As you are guaranteed to get all of your money back it is zero risk.

Lck_2

cyclechap wrote: »

I have been watching with interest the lists of daily outputs but I think it is wiser to take a longer term view. My system has been active for exactly 1 year as of yesterday.

I have an unusual tariff in that I get cheap electric (white meter) for three hours each afternoon as well as overnight. This makes it difficult to put a price on the value of free electricity I have used. So I have had to make an estimate of what proportion was generated at what time of day. I have erred on the pessamistic side so as not to unreasonably inflate the figures.

Of course the cash paid out to me is set.

My system is not ideal in that I do not face due south, indeed I am only a degree or two south of due west. On the plus side I live high on a hill (1000ft) and so keep the sun later than people on the distant coast.

Overall the return on my investment over the whole year has been 9.2% and of course this is tax free!

I am thus very happy with the system. When I bought it I never thought about "how long will it take to pay for itself" but I did want a good investment rather than having money lying in a savings account earning 3 to 4% if you are lucky.

If you can afford the system it gives a good return

Would you mind posting your outputs for say the last 2 weeks? I would have thought (though I could be way out) that your due west array should produce similar to my east -west one

c_smith

What concerns me about the feed in tariff 25 year guarantee, is whether the government or successive governments will honour it. Look what they're doing with public sector pensions. People paid into these for years under the promise they will get x upon their retiral. Now the government want public sector workers to pay more, work longer and get less out than was originally promised.

If they can do it with pensions, don't think for one minute they wouldn't do it with these feed in tariff guarantees. I wouldn't touch solar power with a barge pole because of this. This government can't be trusted.

grahamc2003

c_smith wrote: »

What concerns me about the feed in tariff 25 year guarantee, is whether the government or successive governments will honour it. Look what they're doing with public sector pensions. People paid into these for years under the promise they will get x upon their retiral. Now the government want public sector workers to pay more, work longer and get less out than was originally promised.

If they can do it with pensions, don't think for one minute they wouldn't do it with these feed in tariff guarantees. I wouldn't touch solar power with a barge pole because of this. This government can't be trusted.

Exactly. A government guarantee is actually worth nothing at all, unlike say a guarantee from Currys (or virtually anyone else), who can be sued if they don't honour it.

The reason the government can simply change the terms of the public sector's pensions, and get away with it, is because there is a sense of unfairness surrounding those pensions. (They could of course change them without that sense of unfairness, but then they wouldnt stay in power much longer).

My belief is that the fits in their present form will at some stage be judged to be 'unfair' by the general public (i.e. electricity users, who pay for the fits) at some stage in the next 25 years. It seems odd and unjust to me that many people without even the possibility of having solar panels and also being in fuel poverty are subsidising the generally middle classes who have the odd £15k lying around to invest (or private companies set up to exploit the subsidies).

That certainly looks like a mix to !!!! people off in the future, imv.

keith_r59

c_smith wrote: »

What concerns me about the feed in tariff 25 year guarantee, is whether the government or successive governments will honour it. Look what they're doing with public sector pensions. People paid into these for years under the promise they will get x upon their retiral. Now the government want public sector workers to pay more, work longer and get less out than was originally promised.

If they can do it with pensions, don't think for one minute they wouldn't do it with these feed in tariff guarantees. I wouldn't touch solar power with a barge pole because of this. This government can't be trusted.

Solar power is certainly not an investment for the risk averse. Your money, your choice.

keith_r59

grahamc2003 wrote: »

My belief is that the fits in their present form will at some stage be judged to be 'unfair' by the general public (i.e. electricity users, who pay for the fits) at some stage in the next 25 years. It seems odd and unjust to me that many people without even the possibility of having solar panels and also being in fuel poverty are subsidising the generally middle classes who have the odd £15k lying around to invest (or private companies set up to exploit the subsidies).

I doubt it. The FITs paid for small household solar pv systems are absolutely minuscule when compared to the other green subsidies given to the rich landowners and large corporations.

The general public should be more worried about ROC subsidies than FITs.

alterego_2

"That certainly looks like a mix to !!!! people off in the future, imv."

Quite agree. And as I wasn't asked if I wanted to pay for it, I'm not sure I will have a lot a sympathy, either.

keith_r59

alterego wrote: »

"That certainly looks like a mix to !!!! people off in the future, imv."

Quite agree. And as I wasn't asked if I wanted to pay for it, I'm not sure I will have a lot a sympathy, either.

You will absolutely distraught when you realise the full extent of what the Government spends your taxes on or are you one of these people who believe that they should only be spent on things that you either benefit from or approve of?

Cardew

keith_r59 wrote: »

You will absolutely distraught when you realise the full extent of what the Government spends your taxes on or are you one of these people who believe that they should only be spent on things that you either benefit from or approve of?

Surely you understand the difference between taxes and FITs?

With Taxes everyone pays - including the well off who pay more than the impoverished.

With FITs, the poor who can't afford Solar PV, those who rent, live in flats, or unsuitable houses pay to the better-off.

I can think of no other Government mandated system, ever implimented, where a poor pensioner in a council flat has to pay a levy that goes to houseowners who can afford £10,000 plus, or even worse to venture capitalists funding 'Rent a Roof' companies.

orrery

Lck wrote: »

Would you mind posting your outputs for say the last 2 weeks? I would have thought (though I could be way out) that your due west array should produce similar to my east -west one

There is a good chart here showing the variation with roof inclination and direction:

http://www.solarcentury.co.uk/knowledge-base/pv-performance/

My roof is 20 degrees facing SE, so I should get 96% of maximum - the ideal being about 30 degrees inclination facing due south. A normal roof facing due east or west would get 86% of maximum.