Solar panels: a warning

The_Green_Hornet

Row erupts in pretty 18th century street as cottage owners cover their roof with 20 solar panels.

Seems I have a different definition of the word "pretty" when compared to the Daily Mail.

Mind you they could have "centred" the panels on the roof to give a proper sense of symmetry, but that is just nitpicking.

Martyn1981

ed110220 wrote: »

Typical Daily Mail scaremongering, probably written for the benefit of people who think global warming is a hoax perpetrated by world communism.

Actually it's quite a funny piece.

"The owners of a picturesque cottage in an historic conservation area have left fellow residents 'horrified' after they covered their roof in 20 garish solar panels."

and

"Many locals fear the development will set a precedent and other homeowners will follow suit."

I assume that 'other homeowners', 'fellow residents' and 'locals' all refer to the same group of people. So in reality, it's just a matter of some liking/wanting them, and some disliking/not wanting them. And the Daily Fail trying to create division. Surprised they didn't blame the PV on roving bands of immigrant installers! :rotfl:


Here's another great 'anti-PV' article by the Daily Fail:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2314691/Its-like-living-tanning-salon-Familys-agony-neighbours-solar-panels-reflects-sunlight-directly-home.html

Actually I feel sorry for Mr Phipps, but can anyone explain a few things to me regarding the lead photo:

1. Why is there such a strong glare on a cloudy day?
2. How are the panels (behind Mr Phipps) reflecting onto his sunglasses?
3. Why does the reflection on his sunglasses and on the window appear to resemble a photographic lighting umbrella?

I'm sure there's a simple and innocent explanation.

Mart.

KevinG

The_Green_Hornet wrote: »

Mind you they could have "centred" the panels on the roof to give a proper sense of symmetry, but that is just nitpicking.

I would imagine it's to reduce the shading from the adjacent roof.

Fruit_and_Nut_Case

The_Green_Hornet wrote: »

Mind you they could have "centred" the panels on the roof to give a proper sense of symmetry, but that is just nitpicking.

Not so much the symmetry that worries me; there seems to be quite a sag in that array. I hope the roof can take the strain.

moonquack78

DKLS wrote: »

I would have a ground array system, but simply wouldnt have roof mounted panels as they look so !!!!!!, the last house I viewed was ruined by solar panels it was a victorian villa, and every aspect of curb appeal had been ruined. I am yet to see an attractive installation in this country.

Saving a few quid isnt enough of an incentive to ruin a house for me.

Surely some company could develop solar panel roof tiles, that look like roof tiles but can harness the suns rays, and then use these in new housing buildings (maybe not replace old ones). Would certainly help to make them a bit more appealing because I agree they look quite ugly when they are just slapped on top of a roof.

moonquack78

The_Green_Hornet wrote: »

Row erupts in pretty 18th century street as cottage owners cover their roof with 20 solar panels.

Seems I have a different definition of the word "pretty" when compared to the Daily Mail.

Mind you they could have "centred" the panels on the roof to give a proper sense of symmetry, but that is just nitpicking.

Or they could have added an extra column of panels which would have evened it out a bit.

EricMears

moonquack78 wrote: »

Surely some company could develop solar panel roof tiles, that look like roof tiles but can harness the suns rays, and then use these in new housing buildings (maybe not replace old ones). Would certainly help to make them a bit more appealing because I agree they look quite ugly when they are just slapped on top of a roof.

There are in fact several such offerings on the market e.g. this one came up first in a Google search.

Fine for new builds or anyone needing a complete re-roof but not much good to the rest of us. I haven't investigated price but seem to recall reading somewhere that they didn't offer a huge saving over 'ordinary' tiles + SPs

[Deleted User]

Cardew wrote: »

On the other hand!

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2209909/Solar-panels-ruin-picturesque-street.html

How much would it have increased the value of this property!!

Suggest this...

Sarah Beeny's Streets Ahead

Cardew

That post on that deadful PV display was in response to this:

So DKLS (and others) will be in a minority, desiring a majority of properties.

Given that PV will probably push house values up a little
(energy savings and investment returns), then non-PV may push prices down a little due to comparably higher energy bills, and lower desirability.

So, a minority, desiring a majority of properties that may have slightly lower values. Could work out well.

In many cases(IMO) PV panels will detract from the value of the property - even if they were attracting the high 'first timers' FIT of £1500+ pa.

Surely anyone tempted to buy that property would remove the panels - nobody but nobody can argue against that fact that they ruin the appearance of the house.

I note that some of the PV enthusiasts on this thread post that their panels are not really visible!

It is all very well being smug about the money you are making, but many consider the panels are ugly, and in many cases detract from the value of the property.

People do all sorts of hideous things to their homes and I don't think this is nearly one of the worst,

So you agree it is hideous? What would be worse?

pops5588

We are in the process of buying a property with RAR solar panels on. They are at the back of the house and we aren't overlooked so you can't even see them.

It has added a bit of time onto the whole process of the purchase but the company who did it are one of the few reputable ones that put a clause in to protect the mortgage lender so they were happy to lend.

I think it's largely a case of doing your homework, not all are bad.