Does anyone here have an ideological objection to Solar?

Martyn1981

Energetic wrote: »

!!!!!!? That doesn't happen... Dont hang your wet washing on them though...

Zeup and Don did try to head it off, but to no avail. Leading to my humourous (or not?) attempt to advise:

Martyn1981 wrote: »

Holy Exploding Undersized Inverters Batman!

Did it work? Did it hell!

Got there in the end though, that's the important thing I suppose. Live and learn.

(**More importantly: No animals (or humans) were hurt in the making of this discussion**) :rotfl:

Mart.

Kernel_Sanders

Energetic wrote: »

!!!!!!? That doesn't happen...

Certainly hope not, mine's in a bedroom.....

Martyn1981

zeupater wrote: »

Logic covered so far .... now for reasoning based on logic ....

Would it be logical or reasonable to consider both related tangible & even intangible benefits ? ... yes .... such as ? ... well consider the the UK energy market will soon probably be approaching £500billion/year, if the result of FiTs reduces the rate of price increase by just 1%, in just one year of the 20/25 years which the scheme is designed to operate, then the compounded effect of the saving would likely return the cost of the entire scheme to the consumer many times over (£1.064billion budget as at Jan'12) ... Is this a logical consideration .... yes ? .... is it correct ? .... well, the reasoning is sound and certainly deserves consideration ...

HTH
Z

Zeup, long-term, not just an issue of costs, but also distribution of monies:

http://zerocarbonista.com/2012/12/04/monopoly-money/

Mart.

zeupater

Martyn1981 wrote: »

Zeup, long-term, not just an issue of costs, but also distribution of monies:

http://zerocarbonista.com/2012/12/04/monopoly-money/

Mart.

Hi

Good to see such strong margins .... , mind though, it's interesting to see that the sector is paying dividends at a level 25% greater than profits .... I wonder if OFGEM noticed this when the distribution companies justified their price increases on an investment cost basis ? .... If the data is accurate, it simply looks like a form of asset-stripping to me, effectively withdrawing future value from the companies today....

Strip & Dump ??
Z

Martyn1981

zeupater wrote: »

Hi

There's no need to ask me, ask the energy generation & supply industries ... they've done the calculations and, probably due to being vertically integrated, they seem to have decided that they don't want to invest in any form of generation which can't be controlled by carbon fuel market pricing .... a significant price stabalising generation capacity such as renewables or nuclear provides competition to their bottom line, especially so considering the current strong calls for market transparency.

HTH
Z

Credit where credit's due, I don't know if you've got a crystal ball (or just got lucky), but my hat is firmly off to you:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2012/dec/07/nuclear-edf-hinkley-point

"The troubled French nuclear giant EDF has postponed its decision on whether to build a new power station at Hinkley Point in Somerset.

The delay puts the nuclear renaissance at the heart of the UK government's energy plans into further doubt after a difficult week in which EDF was hit by cost overruns and the exit of its partner from a key French project.

The new reactors at Hinkley were to be the first of a new generation of atomic plants in the UK and EDF had repeatedly pledged to make a final investment decision by the end of 2012.

But the decision to plough billions of pounds into the project is now unlikely to be taken before April 2013, according to sources close to the project, although EDF declined to comment.

"This is another broken promise from EDF on a policy that has always been failing," said Tom Burke, the founding director of the green thinktank E3G.

"To spend at least £14bn on a pair of reactors at Hinkley is very, very high risk." "

Mart.

ukenergystore

i have installed a couple of very good devices that help reduce export and ensure the electricity is put to us4. Passiv energy do a great system with a smart switch sending excess to anything you plug into it. and immersun have a great switching device for heating hot water. both clients over the moon with the results

Kernel_Sanders

OK less of this frivolity!
I'm tired of going into the bedroom to see how much I'm generating. Does the SMA's remote bluetooth app work with Android 3.2 (Gingerbread)? I can get a phone with that OS for just £39.99 with 02 (less possible £5.55 cashback). http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.php?t=4333851

John_Pierpoint

I have found this thread very informative, to those already in the know.

However, as someone who got taken to task for using the expression
"Building Envelope" by someone who thought envelopes were for letters; we must be alienating the inexperienced reader.

Martyn1981 as keeper of the sustainable technology archive, do we have a glossary explaining the technological jargon? Particularly the use of TLAs (Three Letter Acronyms) ?

In no particular order the debate has swept through FIT-MCS-LPG-PV-DECC-AGW-CCS-HS2-ETpanel-CHP-ASHP-RaR-PWC-HVDC, some of which had me doing a double take [AGW : A**** Global Warming ?].

Posting #62 in the blue text, picks its way through the problem of jargon quite well?

Martyn1981

John_Pierpoint wrote: »

I have found this thread very informative, to those already in the know.

However, as someone who got taken to task for using the expression
"Building Envelope" by someone who thought envelopes were for letters; we must be alienating the inexperienced reader.

Martyn1981 as keeper of the sustainable technology archive, do we have a glossary explaining the technological jargon? Particularly the use of TLAs (Three Letter Acronyms) ?

In no particular order the debate has swept through FIT-MCS-LPG-PV-DECC-AGW-CCS-HS2-ETpanel-CHP-ASHP-RaR-PWC-HVDC, some of which had me doing a double take [AGW : A**** Global Warming ?].

Posting #62 in the blue text, picks its way through the problem of jargon quite well?

Hiya John, happy to put a list together on the FAQ thread. In fact, I need to split that post into two parts anyway, as it's a pain to use at the moment, since I'm bouncing off the character limit.

(Update: FAQ thread chopped and re-arranged - ready for a list of acronyms if anyone wants to suggest some)

AGW means 'anthropogenic global warming' need to be specific on that point, as we are in a global warming phase (still coming out of an ice-age) so need to look at the man-made element, shouldn't really need pointing out - but give an inch and you'll have to explain a yard. So if I just said global warming or climate change, we'd have to wade through the natural bit (argument) each time.

A point I must make though refers to "we must be alienating the inexperienced reader". There's no point in me being polite anymore, as far as Team GC are concerned, I have assumed all year that the whole point of constantly referring to qualifications, knowledge, word games (multi GW etc!) and false data (tariffs and 'theories') was to alienate the inexperienced reader, and prevent fact and logic based discussion?

Mart.

Kernel_Sanders

John_Pierpoint wrote: »

IA superb exercise in getting off topic.

Do you include my query in that? Seriously, I'm desperate for a new phone and really need to have one ordered before 4pm Tuesday.