Is solar PV worth it?

The_Green_Man_2

tunnel wrote: »

If i go out to work and earn money and can afford to put panels on,then so what. Anyone can do it,yes anyone,we've all got a brain. Just because i decided to use it doesn't make me a bad person.

If you went out to work and earned money and could afford to put panels on then you wouldn't hear a peek out of me. However, you clearly couldn't afford to do this and so you needed help from other people in the form of a subsidy, many of whom have much less money than yourself.

tunnel

The_Green_Man wrote: »

If you went out to work and earned money and could afford to put panels on then you wouldn't hear a peek out of me. However, you clearly couldn't afford to do this and so you needed help from other people in the form of a subsidy, many of whom have much less money than yourself.

Actually i could afford to put them on if i so wished,you just assumed that i needed the FITs to do it. Don't get me wrong,without the FITs at the time as Eric has already pointed out,solar PV would be a dead loss and only a fool would have invested in them because of the payback.

With the current price for a 4kWp system hovering around the £5k mark it won't be long before the FIT isn't required anymore,providing users can make use of the many gadgets that are available to utilise all the generated power. ie immersuns.

Even then you'll probably still come on here moaning that people should only use what they need and not what they generate.

I suggest you go back to your expensive insulation that "rich" people can afford and leave us PV'ers to enjoy our "ill gotten gains"

Martyn1981

Cardew wrote: »

The implication is that you are either Graham or myself, both of whom have tried to talk sense to the vested interests on this forum.

Don't mimd the Guru(Martyn); his lack of any form of logic shines out like a beacon on this section of MSE.

I can see that you share many similarities, in both the 'sense that you talk' and your 'shining logic'.

As you know, I'm more than happy to mythbust your disinformation, but the sheer scale of recent errors is actually starting to make you look .... (dare I risk a compliment) ... not quite so bad!

Martyn1981 wrote: »

By telling people they are wrong but posting numerous errors, what do you expect in response?

.......

I look forward to more of your logic and sense talking, I'm sure it will be as accurate, honest and well researched as the rest of your PV posts.

Mart.

spgsc531

Cardew wrote: »

I don't know 'The Green Man's' views(1), but I don't think I have read anywhere on this forum a criticism(2) of individuals who have taken advantage of the FIT scheme - not even the Rent-a-Roof firms who are creaming off subsidies from the many thousands of systems - one firm alone has installed over 10,000 systems which brings in an income of many £millions.(2)

My criticism is squarely aimed at the Government for allowing such a stupid scheme (3).

Also at the ingenuous posters with PV who attempt(and fail) to defend the indefensible(4).

(1) So, why thanking his posts? Although, noted you've stopped recently (wonder why?)

(2):rotfl::rotfl::rotfl::rotfl::rotfl:

(3) (IMO?)

(4) (You forgot your IMO)

spgsc531

The_Green_Man wrote: »

I'm happy to stack my 'green' credentials against anyone here, though I don't generally go in for these sorts of p*ssing contests(1). If you think that 'being green' means throwing up a few subsidized PV panels, then I think you are seriously mistaken.

I'm not sure what you are on about with the false ID I'm 'hiding behind'? Are you saying that I have to publish my name and address on this public internet forum?

(1) Posted 2:18pm then at 3:31pm you post:

The_Green_Man wrote: »

In my home, I have installed a combination of sheep wool, wood fibre boards, wood wool board, hemp lime and hemp batts to help provide breathable insulation.

After installing a loft full of rockwool several years ago in a previous property, I have to say that I absolutely loved installing rolls of sheep wool in our new lofts. Even the cat seemed to love them, evidenced by the number of times I found him lying on top of the rolls.

The one I didn't enjoy installing was the wood fibre boards as internal wall insulation. There was a huge amount of prep work in levelling the stone rubble walls with lime plaster and then mechanically fixing each board to the plastered wall. In another part of the house, I battened out and filled between and behind the battens with sheep wool and covered it all with wood wool boards. Much more straightforward and extremely quick!

Lime plastering with hemp lime was also a struggle - I had a mate who is a plasterer helping me and, with a disgusted look on his face as he examined the hemp lime on his float, announced "It's like smearing horse sh*t on a wall".

It looks great now that it's up though- very rustic and absolutely perfect for our barn conversion.

tunnel wrote: »

Even then you'll probably still come on here moaning that people should only use what they need and not what they generate.

I suggest you go back to your expensive insulation that "rich" people can afford and leave us PV'ers to enjoy our "ill gotten gains"

Ouch

tunnel

Cardew wrote: »

I don't know 'The Green Man's' views, but I don't think I have read anywhere on this forum a criticism of individuals who have taken advantage of the FIT scheme - not even the Rent-a-Roof firms who are creaming off subsidies from the many thousands of systems - one firm alone has installed over 10,000 systems which brings in an income of many £millions.

My criticism is squarely aimed at the Government for allowing such a stupid scheme.

Also at the ingenuous posters with PV who attempt(and fail) to defend the indefensible.

Actually Cardew,maybe you have never read anything on here as such but i certainly did yesterday. The green mans post,thats post 66 for anyone reading,you'll notice it was first posted at 9.23am and then very quickly edited at 9.26am.

I read that post pre edit and found it to be a very offensive personal attack on spgsc531.

Now i have no problem trading punches on here with anyone who doesn't agree/disagree on FITs,its everyones personal view and their entitled to it,but i do draw the line at such offensive behaviour.

Tunnel

Martyn1981

tunnel wrote: »

Actually Cardew,maybe you have never read anything on here as such but i certainly did yesterday. The green mans post,thats post 66 for anyone reading,you'll notice it was first posted at 9.23am and then very quickly edited at 9.26am.

I read that post pre edit and found it to be a very offensive personal attack on spgsc531.

Now i have no problem trading punches on here with anyone who doesn't agree/disagree on FITs,its everyones personal view and their entitled to it,but i do draw the line at such offensive behaviour.

Tunnel

Also there have been several references to 'snouts in troughs' and challenges of how PV'ers can sleep at night.

An astonishingly large number of abusive comments, in a very, very short length of time. Apparently all condoned by Cardew.

Martyn.

The_Green_Man_2

tunnel wrote: »

Actually Cardew,maybe you have never read anything on here as such but i certainly did yesterday. The green mans post,thats post 66 for anyone reading,you'll notice it was first posted at 9.23am and then very quickly edited at 9.26am.

I read that post pre edit and found it to be a very offensive personal attack on spgsc531.

Now i have no problem trading punches on here with anyone who doesn't agree/disagree on FITs,its everyones personal view and their entitled to it,but i do draw the line at such offensive behaviour.

Tunnel

Just noticed this. It's a blatant lie but I can't defend myself against it. All I can say is that everyone who has edited their posts on here originally posted something appalling about me and then deleted it. You rotters.

See how it works? Pathetic way of diverting attention against the debate, which is whether poor people should subsidize the rich. I vote no.

EricMears

The_Green_Man wrote: »

See how it works? Pathetic way of diverting attention against the debate, which is whether poor people should subsidize the rich. I vote no.

I didn't see the posting in question so have no view on it.

However, I wasn't aware that the FIT question was open for debate. The only vote that could have influenced that was the general election that selected the parliament which presided over the scheme's introduction.

As it happens, the FIT scheme commenced in April 2010 (just a few weeks before the last change of government). So pretty pointless deciding to vote labour at next election because it was them in charge at introduction. Equally pointless voting conservative because they supported scheme. I don't think voting 'green' would help a great deal either - our one & only 'green' MP wasn't elected at the time but their manifesto seemed to be well & truly in favour of small scale renewable generation. UKIP appear to be anti-FIT but even if they form our next government, they'd not be able to renege on existing contracts.

tunnel

The_Green_Man wrote: »

Just noticed this. It's a blatant lie but I can't defend myself against it. All I can say is that everyone who has edited their posts on here originally posted something appalling about me and then deleted it. You rotters.

See how it works? Pathetic way of diverting attention against the debate, which is whether poor people should subsidize the rich. I vote no.

Yeah yeah yeah,call me a liar for all i care,i'm not getiing into an arguement over it,i know what i read..end of.

People come on these boards to educate themselves and share their experiences about renewable technologies but instead get embroiled in the continous bickering. If you don't like the FIT take the arguement to the goverment not us.

Instead, why not actually try and bring something to the table,something that can benefit everyone? You seem fairly passionate about natural resources,can they be accessed by everyone? Or dare i say without starting an arguement,just the rich?