Pay off a chunk of mortgage or invest in Solar PV?

acs901

> I'm not sure whey you think solar energy is inefficient. Have you not realised that oil, coal, and gas are becoming scarcer...?

I didn't say solar energy is inefficient. But generating electricity using hundreds of thousands of small PVs that cannot even generate enough power for the houses they're on top of (along with all the metering, inverters and accounting arrangements) is inefficient.

The inefficiency is demonstrated by the fact that it wouldn't be financially worth installing PVs without them being subsidized by other taxpayers.

--
John

Innys

acs901 wrote: »

Because the owner is getting a benefit thats only possible because he is being subsidised by other taxpayers.

--
John

This is true of all benefits - think about it.

As for "getting something for nothing from the state", this again, is true of all benefits.

I have a PV installation and I don't care that it's being subsidised by everyone else.

I'm single, don't have kids, have never claimed any benefits, am healthy and provide for myself. Nevertheless I've paid 40% tax for more than 20 years.

If a PV installation means that I can now get back some of the many tens of thousands of pounds of tax I have paid, I have no problem with that and I'm certainly not going to apologise for it.

thenudeone

acs901 wrote: »

> it wouldn't be financially worth installing PVs without them being subsidized by other taxpayers.

John

1) they are "subsidised" through electricity bills, not through taxes.

2) they need to be subsidised at current energy prices and current panel efficiency levels. Both are rising. Panels will probably be financially self-sufficient within a decade or two. Not too bad when you consider the length of time it takes to obtain any return on, say, investment in a nuclear power station.

3) Who do you think should pay for the damage to the climate caused by CO2 emissions?
a) Its' a left-wing conspiracy and doesn't exist. Most scientists have got it wrong.
b) Ignore it - it doesn't matter is poor countries get flooded or suffer droughts and future generations have lost half the wildlife on the planet
c) Governments should pay (through taxes)
d) The people creating the CO2 emissions by using energy, should pay, thus creating an incentive to reduce energy usage?

4)What are you going to do when the oil and gas runs out?

acs901

> they are "subsidised" through electricity bills, not through taxes.
You're quite right. I'm using 'taxpayers' as a lazy shorthand for bill-payers.

> Panels will probably be financially self-sufficient within a decade or two.
Bring it on. It's the FiT I object to, not PVs themselves (although they are ugly at the moment (perhaps in a decade they'll look much better too)).

> Who do you think should pay for the damage to the climate caused by CO2 emissions?
> What are you going to do when the oil and gas runs out?
You seem to be under the impression I'm a fan of fossil fuels. I'm not. I think government policy should encourage people to consume less. Encouraging people to buy more 'stuff'; PVs, new hybrid cars or whatever the latest 'green' fashion accessory is, is the wrong approach. Like I said, insulating lofts is a bit dull.

--
John

Tobyemery

It's a con. Inverter breaks every 7 years, £800 to replace, you don't use much energy during the day anyway, they are looking at reducing the feed in tarrif. After 10 years they become 80% efficient.

We sell these kits and we always try and put people off them, your much better off getting solar thermal.

If the government pulls their finger out their !!!! and brings out the green initiative, then the thermal panels will pay themselves off in about 5 years. Boiler is switched off from about April till september, they save around £300 on hot water, with a pay out from the government at about the same. rather than the 30 odd years solar pv does.

You may think you're getting what your installers said you are but half the time your not.

Don't do it. Plus you can't take them off again to do loft conversion etc etc. or for a bit more an air source heat pump, I'll ask my brother how much they save you a year but again untill the government releases this scheme then people will just keep banging on about solar pv, because they hear feed tarrif. Why wait 20+ years to start getting the money from it :rotfl:

Oh to above, that's why people buy pv, as they can boast about it. Boast about just wasting 15k lol. Also if it isn't wired back into your main meter than nothing gets exported.

Random_User_Name

Tobyemery wrote: »

... We sell these kits and we always try and put people off them, your much better off getting solar thermal. ...

Are you sure you are correct about all your statements? I'd have thought that someone selling these items would know something of the scheme ...

"You will qualify for the full FIT payments if:

• It is installed after 1st April 2010 using an MCS* certificated product and installer;"

Selling kits, unless installed by a certified installer, will get the purchaser little in FiT benifits.

Tobyemery wrote: »

... Also if it isn't wired back into your main meter than nothing gets exported.

And you wouldn't qualify for the FiT ... kind of the main reason to install them for most people. :think:

"You will require an additional electricity meter to measure the electricity that your system is generating (known as a total generation meter), and also to measure how much is being fed back into the electricity grid (if not deemed, this is known as an export meter or may be called a feed-in, feed-out meter)."

Source: Energy Savings Trust (http://www.energysavingtrust.org.uk/Generate-your-own-energy/Sell-your-own-energy/Feed-in-Tariff-scheme)

I think your post raises several (of which these two are simply examples) points that may not be actually fully correct.

Finally, why would the rate paid change (the rate laid out in the agreement)? It is not like it is coming from the government (but rather punters like me & you) - so why should the govt. care how much it costs?

IronWolf

what about in 5 years when solar panels cost 1/4 of the price and are 5x more efficient?

Technology moves fast.

thenudeone

IronWolf wrote: »

Technology moves fast.

But not that fast!

Cars, planes, computers, domestic appliances, heating, lighting, have all got more efficient and cheaper in real terms over time as the market develops.

The same is already happening with renewable energy.

That's exactly why governments are legislating - to encourage the market to develop faster and efficiencies to improve. That's why the FIT scheme for new investment in 2012 gives a lower rate per unit, and a lower rate each year after that.

IronWolf wrote: »

what about in 5 years when solar panels cost 1/4 of the price and are 5x more efficient?

If it happens that fast, the government will pull the plug on new FIT schemes because it will no longer be necessary.

thenudeone

Tobyemery wrote: »

Why wait 20+ years to start getting the money from it :rotfl:

You clearly have no idea what you are talking about.

A good solar PV system will give an index-linked tax-free return of 10-12% pa and pay for itself in 8-10 years, not 20+

That compares very favourably with a savings accounts paying just 3-4% before tax.

Tobyemery wrote: »

Also if it isn't wired back into your main meter than nothing gets exported.

Of course not.

To repeat - You clearly have no idea what you are talking about.

Tobyemery

thenudeone wrote: »

You clearly have no idea what you are talking about.

A good solar PV system will give an index-linked tax-free return of 10-12% pa and pay for itself in 8-10 years, not 20+

That compares very favourably with a savings accounts paying just 3-4% before tax.



Of course not.

To repeat - You clearly have no idea what you are talking about.

LOl ok, it'll get paid off in 8 years......

I've known it too happen, average joe wouldn't know about it and not get any money back at all.

Do you fit pv?