Forum Home» Green & Ethical MoneySaving

Solar ... In the news - Page 129

New Post Advanced Search

Solar ... In the news

edited 7 January 2013 at 6:48PM in Green & Ethical MoneySaving
2.8K replies 453.1K views
1126127129131132281

Replies

  • Martyn1981Martyn1981 Forumite
    10.8K posts
    Part of the Furniture 10,000 Posts Name Dropper Photogenic
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    Does anyone remember Graham telling me to "put up or shut up" when he said Drax could generate in 12mins the equivalent of a whole years worth of UK PV, and I suggested he was out by a factor of 1,000 ...... well .......

    Solar power sets new British record by beating coal for a day

    National Grid data gathered by climate analysts Carbon Brief showed that 29 gigawatt hours (GWh) of power was generated on Saturday by solar, or 4% of national demand that day, versus 21GWh from coal-fired power stations.

    Mart.
    Mart. Cardiff. 5.58 kWp PV systems (3.58 ESE & 2.0 WNW)

    For general PV advice please see the PV FAQ thread on the Green & Ethical Board.
  • Exiled_TykeExiled_Tyke Forumite
    412 posts
    Fourth Anniversary 100 Posts
    ✭✭
    Another interesting article on the progress of solar. Not much new here but it is from the well-trusted economist.

    http://www.economist.com/news/leaders/21696935-see-how-bright-future-solar-energy-look-developing-world-new-sunbathers?frsc=dg%7Cd
    Install 28th Nov 15, 3.3kW, (11x300LG), SolarEdge, SW. W Yorks.
    Install 2: Sept 19, 600W SSE
    Solax 6.3kW battery
  • Martyn1981Martyn1981 Forumite
    10.8K posts
    Part of the Furniture 10,000 Posts Name Dropper Photogenic
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    San Francisco adopts law requiring solar panels on all new buildings
    San Francisco has this week passed landmark legislation requiring all new buildings under 10 storeys in height to be fitted with rooftop solar panels.

    The city’s San Francisco Board of Supervisors unanimously passed the new rule on Tuesday, making the metropolis the largest in the US to mandate solar installations on new properties.
    “This legislation will activate our roofs, which are an under-utilised urban resource, to make our city more sustainable and our air cleaner,” Wiener added.

    San Francisco has a target to source 100% of its electricity from renewable sources by 2020 and has emerged as one of the US’s leading clean tech hubs with a raft of Silicon Valley investors and entrepreneurs backing a host of green technology start-ups in the region.

    Mart.
    Mart. Cardiff. 5.58 kWp PV systems (3.58 ESE & 2.0 WNW)

    For general PV advice please see the PV FAQ thread on the Green & Ethical Board.
  • Lifes_Grand_PlanLifes_Grand_Plan Forumite
    1.1K posts
    Ninth Anniversary 500 Posts Photogenic
    ✭✭✭
    Martyn1981 wrote: »
    But can imagine the anti-FiT boys spitting blood if it generates on a rainy night. :angry:

    I'm new to this thread (and solar generally) but find it strange that anyone would be anti-FiT. Why are they?
    A big believer in karma, you get what you give :A

    If you find my posts useful, "pay it forward" and help someone else out, that's how places like MSE can be so successful.
  • CardewCardew Forumite
    28.1K posts
    Part of the Furniture 10,000 Posts Name Dropper Rampant Recycler
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    I'm new to this thread (and solar generally) but find it strange that anyone would be anti-FiT. Why are they?


    Assuming your post isn't a wind-up!


    Read this article:


    http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2010/mar/01/solar-panel-feed-in-tariff


    Early adopters who own their house now getting around 50p(fifty pence) for every kWh they generate and if they can find ways of using that electricity in their house they don't have to export a single kWh.


    That subsidy isn't paid by the Government but by a levy on all other electricity consumers. So, say, pensioners living in an all-electric council flat are paying towards the subsidy for house owners who could be much better off.


    The above is just addressing the subsidy, not the fact that solar is unreliable and contributes nothing to the UK's peak loading on the Grid.


    The majority of regular contributors to this section of MSE are in receipt of FIT so feel the need to defend solar!


    Plenty of reading on FIT in this section.
  • edited 22 April 2016 at 10:59AM
    EricMearsEricMears Forumite
    2.7K posts
    Tenth Anniversary 1,000 Posts Name Dropper
    ✭✭✭✭
    edited 22 April 2016 at 10:59AM
    Cardew wrote: »
    Assuming your post isn't a wind-up!

    Read this article:
    http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2010/mar/01/solar-panel-feed-in-tariff
    I wouldn't bother ! The article is six years old, was incredibly inaccurate and biassed then and hasn't got any better. There are plenty of more up to date sources available.
    Early adopters who own their house now getting around 50p(fifty pence) for every kWh they generate and if they can find ways of using that electricity in their house they don't have to export a single kWh.
    Actually I'm getting a little over 50ppu and an annual rate of return on the original investment of around 13%. But bear in mind it was a high risk investment and the powers that be realised that nobody makes a high risk investment without the prospect of high returns. I could probably have made alternative investments in (say) property that might have yielded 20% or more and been able to recover original investment at short notice.
    That subsidy isn't paid by the Government but by a levy on all other electricity consumers. So, say, pensioners living in an all-electric council flat are paying towards the subsidy for house owners who could be much better off
    FIT payments represent a very small proportion of the levy on ALL electricity consumers which was intended to fulfil our 'climate change obligations' by encouraging electricity by means other than fossil fuels. What fairer way of collecting monies for such projects could there be than a levy on electricity bills such that people consuming the most electricity pay most towards the projects ?
    The above is just addressing the subsidy, not the fact that solar is unreliable and contributes nothing to the UK's peak loading on the Grid.
    There is NO power source more reliable than the Sun ! Granted that in the UK sunshine is not quite as abundant as it is in the Sahara we still get far more energy delivered over the whole area of the UK than we could ever dream of using. Nobody has ever claimed that Solar Power generates after dark - but we have wind, tidal, nuclear & other technologies that can fill in the gaps. By encouraging people to use their own generated electricity when it is available, there is an automatic reduction in the amount of energy they'll be buying during the rest of the day.

    Worth remembering that the FIT scheme - and similar ones by other governments - was intended to encourage take up of PV and hence to reduce the costs of such equipment. They've been an outstanding success in achieving those aims. Indeed, prices have dropped so much that there's little need to subsidise new PV investment. If only (say) nuclear power could be in a similar position !

    Welcome to the forum 'Lifes Grand Plan'
    NE Derbyshire.
    4kWp S Facing 17.5deg slope (dormer roof).
    BEV : Nissan Leaf e+
    Octopus referral link (to get a £50 initial credit): https://share.octopus.energy/teal-beach-204
  • Martyn1981Martyn1981 Forumite
    10.8K posts
    Part of the Furniture 10,000 Posts Name Dropper Photogenic
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    I'm new to this thread (and solar generally) but find it strange that anyone would be anti-FiT. Why are they?

    It's probably just down to saving face these days.

    Cardew has posted many thousands of anti-PV and anti-FiT comments on the Green & Ethical board during the 6 years of FiT.

    Recently however (after I'd been asking him for many years) he finally admitted that he supported nuclear. In that context we can address his concerns.

    He complains about the subsidy cost of PV, but PV is now cheaper than nuclear, despite nuclear having already received 60 years of support. So that one's dead.

    He complains about all consumers paying for the subsidy, but surely the end users should be the ones that subsidise the greening of the industry.

    He complains that not all households receive the FiT. But of course the subsidy goes to the owners of the 'green powerstations', which seems fair. And this of course also raises the issue of hypocrisy, since no households receive the nuclear subsidies, they all go to giant corporations ..... probably the reason why he tried to hide his love of nuclear.

    He regularly raises the issue that households can use as much of the generation as they like. Despite being aware that export and offset have the same effect on the grid. This is just a red herring that he uses hoping to antagonise anyone who doesn't realise this.

    He will always comment that PV doesn't generate at night (he's the only person that I know who finds this a surprise). But of course this is just the old anti-renewables cry against each individual technology .... wind turbines don't work without wind etc.

    He ignores the development of storage that will benefit renewables, and the fact that any nuclear deployment beyond 10GW to 15GW would also need increased storage.

    He ignores the fact that solar is supported by around 80% of Britons, whilst nuclear gets about 35% support.

    He regularly tries the tired trick of pensioners in all electric flats, ignoring the fact that 100's of thousands of installs have been on the rooves of council/social housing, bringing leccy bill savings to the occupants, without any expenditure on their behalf at all.

    He responds to almost any post by referencing a 6 year old article which was a complete joke when it was written. The first paragraph claims that the whole FiT budget would be paid by poor domestic customers, rather than the true distribution across all sectors and all consumers. Despite this he recently said the article was still true, but when I asked him to confirm just some of the statements
    Martyn1981 wrote: »
    Anyways, back to your claim that Monbiot is as true now, as then, so are you claiming the following are all true:-

    he (as usual) ran away again, waiting for another opportunity (such as your post) to repeat the nonsense.


    In essence, he seems to be against subsidies he doesn't get, and the faster the FiT rate for PV dropped (proving its success) the angrier he gets. Go figure!

    Mart.
    Mart. Cardiff. 5.58 kWp PV systems (3.58 ESE & 2.0 WNW)

    For general PV advice please see the PV FAQ thread on the Green & Ethical Board.
  • lstar337lstar337 Forumite
    3.4K posts
    Can we save this thread for News?

    Plenty of space on the rest of of the board for discussing the various merits/demerits of FIT's.
  • EricMearsEricMears Forumite
    2.7K posts
    Tenth Anniversary 1,000 Posts Name Dropper
    ✭✭✭✭
    lstar337 wrote: »
    Can we save this thread for News?

    Plenty of space on the rest of of the board for discussing the various merits/demerits of FIT's.
    I agree with that in principle but felt we ought to answer a query from a new member within the thread in which he/she posed it and as soon as possible.
    NE Derbyshire.
    4kWp S Facing 17.5deg slope (dormer roof).
    BEV : Nissan Leaf e+
    Octopus referral link (to get a £50 initial credit): https://share.octopus.energy/teal-beach-204
  • CardewCardew Forumite
    28.1K posts
    Part of the Furniture 10,000 Posts Name Dropper Rampant Recycler
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    Cardew wrote: »


    The majority of regular contributors to this section of MSE are in receipt of FIT so feel the need to defend solar!


    I rest my case!


    The Guardian article by Monbiot was absolutely true when written and remains true; dismissed by those in receipt of FIT simply because it is true.


    Read it yourself and form your own opinion!
Sign In or Register to comment.

Quick links

Essential Money | Who & Where are you? | Work & Benefits | Household and travel | Shopping & Freebies | About MSE | The MoneySavers Arms | Covid-19 & Coronavirus Support