Solar PV installation to be removed from EPC calculation

michaels

MFW_ASAP wrote: »

I can't see the economic sense in increasing my energy bills in order to pay FITS to someone who wastes energy, but there you go.

Impressed to hear you reduced from an E/F to a B prior to having renewables installed. How did you manage such a significant reduction?

I am happy for you to feel that FIT is not a good use of utility users money but I can not see how energy efficient those individual's properties are has any bearing on the argument either way.

Doubled size of house with extension to latest standards on 2 of 3 external walls, added efficient windows, cavity wall insulation, loft insulation, highest efficiency boiler, fully led lights etc.

MFW_ASAP

michaels wrote: »

I can not see how energy efficient those individual's properties are has any bearing on [FIT payments].

From what Mart has told me, the whole point of using public monies to subsidize domestic solar is to reduce grid demand and increase renewable grid supply.

The first aim is obviously going to be achieved to a greatest extent if grid demand is reduced not just by utilising self-generated energy but by also reducing grid supplied energy demand, especially during the evening and winter months, via energy efficiencies. The second aim is achieved to a greater extent if more solar power makes it to the grid rather than being lost to inefficiencies.

Is it so wrong to try and get the best payback from public monies by encouraging energy efficiencies that result in more renewable energy gets to the grid (if not diverted to hot water cylinders, etc)?

michaels wrote: »

Doubled size of house with extension to latest standards on 2 of 3 external walls, added efficient windows, cavity wall insulation, loft insulation, highest efficiency boiler, fully led lights etc.

You did well to gain a B rating on a retrofit, most new builds that meet building regulations only obtain a C rating. Only 9% of homes tested have received a B.

MFW_ASAP

jeepjunkie wrote: »

I hate point out eh bleeding obvious but it's you that's the bully here

The rest of us are law abiding citizens who have a common interest

How am I bullying anyone? I simply created a thread with information about EPC certificates and solar. I then get accosted by several of the solar boys and I then have to defend myself.

They do this all the time to destroy threads where anyone dares to discuss the shadier side of PV, such as where the FIT finances come from or how some of the rules are bent/broken to get the full tariff.

zeupater

MFW_ASAP wrote: »

On your first point. You're confusing sewage metering with surface water drainage. You're comparing apples with oranges. No wonder you're all over the place with your argument.

Second point. Until I saw some posts from Cardew, I was unaware where the FIT payments came from. As soon as I realised the implications and took the ethical view that I didn't want to take a handout paid for by people who are less well of than myself.

Thanks to Cardew for enlightening me, even though it opened him up to abuse from the likes of yourself who would rather people remained in the dark about FIT funding.

Interestingly, if you read the whole thread, I was mentioning that I wanted to do a DIY install and wondered if the FIT payments has reduced to the point where the artificial 'uplift' they give to solar prices had reduced to the point where DIY was a cheaper route.

It hadn't at that point, though maybe it will now with the FITs being reduced even more?

Also interestingly, I was welcomed on the board until I started to question FIT payment funding and agreeing with Cardew's stance. The Solar bullies soon put me in my place though, eh?

Utter nonsense and deserves addressing in order ....

"Sewage metering" .... that's based on the United Utilities cost per cubic meter for waste water disposal originally provided by Cardew, which, as you are obviously aware, is where a major element of your bill saving would occur with a RWH system .... are you confused or just disingenuous ?

"Second point. Until I saw some posts from Cardew, I was unaware where the FIT payments came from .... " ... then explain how your post dated 27/02/2014 stating

MFW_ASAP wrote: »

... I checked the FIT rate post 1st April 2014 and it drops slightly to 14.38p. I've already had roof insulation installed that meets current building regs and I'm about to have high-spec glazing fitted to the house, so I perhaps may be able to scrape a 'D' efficiency rating?

I'll run some figures (thanks mac2008 for the calcs), but given the reduced VAT on the equipment (5% rather than 20% - provided the installer passes on these savings) and the higher FIT payments for a 'D' rating, I think it'll work out better to have the equipment fitted by an MCS registered installer ...

which postdated this post from 06/03/2013, almost a full year earlier ...

The_Green_Man wrote: »

... Well, I guess it's fine as long as you are the one generating the electricity and receiving the FiTs. If you're the one footing the bill with your raised energy bills, then it's not so fine ...

.. so, obviously, you were totally aware, but at the time something must have made you think that you could possibly take advantage of the FiT scheme after-all, possibly a combination of falling prices, VAT implications and the possibility of achieving a 'D' band EPC with all of the insulation .... are you confused, or just disingenuous?

Regarding "Also interestingly, I was welcomed on the board until I started to question FIT payment funding ..." ... I know, I was one of the posters who attempted to assist on your earliest remaining thread ... https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/4763784 and others regarding RWH etc - however, it wasn't long before the current profile returned to type and continued a targeted vendetta against various posters on these boards which the OP started under multiple previous incarnations.

Interestingly, it's not only this board which you argue on and it's not the only board in which you post insulting comments on and then start using the 'B' word, 'jealousy', 'hate' or angrily complaining when you don't get your own way ... for example, a post from a parallel thread to one on this board which looks to have been started for no other reason than to spark argument ...

MFW_ASAP wrote: »

It's a shame that this thread has become dominated by the hate-filled and angry solar lobby. I'm sure that anyone who doesn't have a blinkered vested interest will have been scared away by them by now - such is the way with internet forum bullies.

Oh well, thanks everyone for the PMs that agreed with my point.

... the thread is particularly interesting because, apart from the OP, there isn't one contributor who posts on this particular board, but the OP's approach is so familiar ....

Genuine posters are welcome on these boards and many seek and get pretty decent advice, so is it really surprising that after displaying such an open intent to incessantly cause argument and mayhem for nothing other than personal gratification your consider that you're no longer openly welcomed here and possibly elsewhere?

"All over the place" ? ... possibly not then ..
Z

[Deleted User]

MFW_ASAP wrote: »

How am I bullying anyone? I simply created a thread with information about EPC certificates and solar. I then get accosted by several of the solar boys and I then have to defend myself.

They do this all the time to destroy threads where anyone dares to discuss the shadier side of PV, such as where the FIT finances come from or how some of the rules are bent/broken to get the full tariff.

So now that PV install prices are half what I paid with a much smaller subsidy paid over a fewer number of years what's the problem? Just go buy and be happy

You can't carry the weight of the world on your shoulders...

Shady FIT finances... Jeez, no wonder folk get wound up...

PS The EPC when I bought this house was G Should I not be allowed to save energy?

MFW_ASAP

zeupater wrote: »

Utter nonsense and deserves addressing in order ....

"Sewage metering" .... that's based on the United Utilities cost per cubic meter for waste water disposal originally provided by Cardew, which, as you are obviously aware, is where a major element of your bill saving would occur with a RWH system .... are you confused or just disingenuous ?

*sigh* You're the one who is confused. Here is Cardew's post that you 'quoted' and are now referring to:

Cardew wrote: »

With United Utilities the charge for Surface Water Drainage(SWD) is £75pa(2014/15)?

I have highlighted the text to make it as clear as possible for you. It says 'Surface Water Drainage'. This is drainage of rainwater that falls on the surface, such as driveways and rooftops. It's nothing at all to do with sewage metering.

Deary me.

EDIT:
For information to people not trying (and failing) to score points, but interested in rainwater harvesting, Cardew was referring to the annual rebate you get if the rainwater that falls on your property and doesn't drain to the public sewer. He stated that it was £75pa. Later in the thread I think I mentioned that it was actually something like £52pa because they don't rebate surface water drainage charge for public highways.

If you fit a rainwater Harvesting system and inform united utilities then the only implication is that they will not pay you the rebate (because your rainwater is obviously going into the public sewers if you're using it to flush toilets!). There is no change to the way they work out your sewage disposal costs because UU do not meter this or use a 'notional' calculation. They seem to take a pragmatic and sensible view, especially in light of all the recent flooding, that you are actually saving them more money in helping to alleviate flash flooding that you're costing them in reduced water bills.

[Deleted User]

MFW_ASAP wrote: »

'Surface Water Drainage'

Oh dear... I don't pay that being in the countryside with no mains drainage... Flame me now

zeupater

MFW_ASAP wrote: »

.... You did well to gain a B rating on a retrofit, most new builds that meet building regulations only obtain a C rating. Only 9% of homes tested have received a B.

I think that 'michaels' has done well too, but it is possible to achieve a B on a retrofit, which says more about the quality and energy efficiency of new builds than anything else.

Our EPC (Yes, I had one done last year just for fun!) puts us at the top end of the 'B' band and if we had floor insulation we'd have attained an 'A' .... the problem is, the assessor knew we already had floor insulation, but wouldn't expend the effort in checking and was unsure about the materials because they weren't a selectable option in the software. Much is due to the RdSAP system not being able to cope with anything out-of-the-norm, totally ignoring the effect of the above-standard loft insulation and uncertificated air tightness etc - this would obviously also be the case for non-standard internal wall insulation too .... the assessor did offer to provide (/sell) us an air-leakage test though!

Z

MFW_ASAP

jeepjunkie wrote: »

Oh dear... I don't pay that being in the countryside with no mains drainage... Flame me now

Haha, I dare say zeupater will be along soon to flame you, he seems to take a dim view of people having reduced water bills! :eek:

Interestingly, (and let's whisper this quietly in case zeupater the "wastewater demon" gets even more in the mood to flame you), if you are on your own cesspit or septic tank you don't have to contribute to surface drainage of the public highway (i.e. all of the UK road and motorway networks). Bit of an odd one but there you go.

zeupater

MFW_ASAP wrote: »

*sigh* You're the one who is confused. Here is Cardew's post that you 'quoted' and are now referring to:

I have highlighted the text to make it as clear as possible for you. It says 'Surface Water Drainage'. This is drainage of rainwater that falls on the surface, such as driveways and rooftops. It's nothing at all to do with sewage metering.

Deary me.

EDIT:
For information to people not trying (and failing) to score points, but interested in rainwater harvesting, Cardew was referring to the annual rebate you get if the rainwater that falls on your property and doesn't drain to the public sewer. He stated that it was £75pa. Later in the thread I think I mentioned that it was actually something like £52pa because they don't rebate surface water drainage charge for public highways.

If you fit a rainwater Harvesting system and inform united utilities then the only implication is that they will not pay you the rebate (because your rainwater is obviously going into the public sewers if you're using it to flush toilets!). There is no change to the way they work out your sewage disposal costs because UU do not meter this or use a 'notional' calculation. They seem to take a pragmatic and sensible view, especially in light of all the recent flooding, that you are actually saving them more money in helping to alleviate flash flooding that you're costing them in reduced water bills.

More misinformation .... Cardew posted ....

Cardew wrote: »

With United Utilities the charge for Surface Water Drainage(SWD) is £75pa(2014/15).

To reduce your bill by 50% even allowing for SWD deduction, I calculate you will need to use approx. 95 cubic metres of rainwater pa. That is also assuming that you don't intend paying the sewerage charge of £1.264/cubic metre for rainwater you are diverting into the sewer via your house

I am a little puzzled why you need to store rainwater, when it would surely be easy to divert/pump water from your stream to a tank?

You'll note that I just highlighted the text which you conveniently left out !

At a weekly usage of ~2000litres, failing to meter the sewerage would save around £130/year (2x1.264x52), which is the figure which was used ....

Totally disingenuous again, I know it, Cardew knows it and so does everyone else .... now, how does that subsidy from billed water users stack up against the FiT (subsidy) which you incessantly argue against ? .....

Morals, ethics & now basic logic?, probably not the OP's strongest virtues then!
Z



#edit ... and of course, as already noted, different suppliers may have different charging structures, however that makes no difference from a subsidy viewpoint, after-all somebody must be paying for the saving on the bill and disposal of the waste.