if solar is good why hasnt every one got it

Martyn1981

Richie-from-the-Boro wrote: »

- because your solar only works for you .. .. .. if I pay for it .. .. .. and I and all energy users do pay for your panels with a hidden levy on our electricity bills
- the amount of sunshine available each year is always exaggerated if you had to pay the full real cost of solar you would never ever contemplate such madness
- all green[ing] initiatives are a scam on all taxpayers, the Germans have dumped green[ing] including windy mills & solar PV
- its dead - find another way - its dead - give the taxpayers a break and produce real energy at real costs
- without all these hidden green taxes our power bills are likely to be several hundred pounds cheaper than they are now

This needs to be placed in context.

Does solar receive subsidies, yes. But do our other forms of generation receive subsidies, yes.

If you accept AGW (man made global warming) then gas generation is subsidised by not paying for its long term impact. As well as an even larger CO2 subsidy, coal has huge cost impacts on health and shortened life, so also receives subsidies, making it about the most expensive technology now.

Nuclear has been subsidised via general taxation for 50 years, and in 10(ish) years the new fleet will be receiving a 35yr subsidy.

In the latest CfD auction large scale PV and on-shore wind came in at lower subsidies than the planned nuclear subsidy, and those subsidies only last 15 yrs. Also the off-shore wind costs are closing in on nuclear fast.

If there was a simple and cheap option for 24/7 generation then we'd be moving to it, but sadly there isn't hence the need to build up an energy toolbox of specialised generation that produces when the wind is blowing, the sun is shining, the tide is moving etc. All of which can reduce gas generation. [I'm referring to gas rather than coal, as coal is on its way out in the UK. It's simply too expensive when all externalities are considered, and the UK fleet is particularly inefficient.]

On the small scale, nothing can compete with PV, as the economies of scale are small, and hence so are the diseconomies. It has the lowest FiT subsidy, which is still dropping fast, and after only 5 years of support is already about 10 years ahead of schedule (compared to the original FiT subsidy planned degression). It is the most viable for small scale distribution and could hopefully be installed by approx 20% of UK households. We are already at about 3% of households. It's also proved very successful with housing association installs, and community projects such as school, church hall, community hall etc installs, or simply through investment schemes such as those offered by Abundance - So most people can get involved/benefit in some way.

On the larger (but still small(ish)) commercial rooftop side, the majority of roofs may be viable, but sadly this sector is slow to pick up, which may be due to the fact that a large proportion of commercial properties are leasehold.

Whilst we clearly have a long way to go, and electricity storage needs to be researched and ramped up, we simply can't ignore generation from 'alternatives', especially when they combine so well eg wind generates more during winter months and nightime, PV during the summer and daytime, backed up by hydro, tidal etc.

Edit: I should add that in total generation terms I can't ever see PV being more than a small brother to wind. However since their differing generation times are such a good complement to each other, then if PV can do this at a lower cost than wind*, then there seems little to worry about. *Large scale PV is already cheaper than off-shore wind, and matched on-shore wind in the CfD auction. Small scale PV is cheaper than small scale wind. M.

Mart.

teabelly

Instead of dumping these great panels all over people's houses it would be much better to using solar paving and have the paving perform a useful function at the same time. The whole interconnected solar roadway concept is much better than just having these roof panels.

Solar paving for people's driveways rather than bunging them on the roof makes much more sense too.

gazapc

teabelly wrote: »

Instead of dumping these great panels all over people's houses it would be much better to using solar paving and have the paving perform a useful function at the same time. The whole interconnected solar roadway concept is much better than just having these roof panels.

Solar paving for people's driveways rather than bunging them on the roof makes much more sense too.

1. Drive ways /roads will generally recieve less sunshine than roofs due to the low angle to the sun and suffer from increased shading
2. Drive ways tend to have things parked on them
3. Making panels which can withstand years of use as a road will vastly increase their cost (much of the savings have been about reducing the amount of materials in the panels via thinner glass, silicon etc.)
4. Roads are dirty places, prepared for reduced performance or the need for regular cleaning.
5. Panels which are designed to replace roads will almost certainly have to compromise on efficiency to fulfill their road surface requirements. Also look for increased degradation as mechanical flexing of panels does contribute to % decrease in performance over time

silverwhistle

Martyn1981 wrote: »

On the larger (but still small(ish)) commercial rooftop side, the majority of roofs may be viable, but sadly this sector is slow to pick up, which may be due to the fact that a large proportion of commercial properties are leasehold.

It's interesting to note that all the big players - Toyota etc., who presumably own their own factories, have done major installs on their roofs.

silverwhistle

teabelly wrote: »

Solar paving for people's driveways rather than bunging them on the roof makes much more sense too.

I've got 4kw of panels on my roof but no drive or garage, let alone the practical reasons noted... But you're right that they'd look better if they were integrated into buildings at the time of construction. Have a search for 'solar tiles' to see the possibilities.

System

An energy mix is needed. Our future French built, Chinese financed and UK taxpayer/consumer paid for fast reactors appear to be close the rocks after faults were found in the French Reactor's metal casings. Sadly, the casings for our new reactors have already been cast

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-32365888

The French project is both already massively delayed and over budget. The good news for PV Solar is that car manufacturers, like BMW, are looking at ways of recycling LioN cells used in their EVs into Solar Farm battery banks.

[Deleted User]

Solar energy is terribly over priced and highly subsidised. The early buyers are now getting 50 p per kwhr when the wholesale price is nearer 5 p per kwhr and many of these actually have backward running analog electric meters which also credit the feed in tariff as well as taking off what they used last night in electric costs.The money would be far better spent on lean burn coal fired power than wasted in this way

silverwhistle

But the subsidies for early adopters have resulted in the reduction in price for subsequent installers, along with even greater reductions in the subsidies, and that process is continueing. Every solar unit generated also results in less (largely imported) finite fossil fuels being burned. Lean burn coal is not the answer.

Backward running analog meters are not the fault of the consumer..

razor344

Lots of haters then

Richie-from-the-Boro

razor344 wrote: »

Lots of haters then

Hate might be too strong a word, certainly I do not like the idea of my personal money paying for your personal solar PV. Whilst I certainly do not mind my personal money paying a subsidy for those defined fuel-poor, those subsidies however should go to bricks & mortar, to moving a dwelling from D or C to B, not paying wealthy pensioners living in the Costa a winter allowance for example.

Hate might be too strong a word, I don't believe in windy-mill or most of the greening because of the subsidy. If you want to put windy-mills or most of the greening into service at your own personal cost you should feel free to do so - but you don't want to pay with your money. If the taxpayers FiT subsidy was dropped altogether you would never consider it, you want me and everyone else on these islands to pay for your solar PV.