Solar panels

Martyn1981

Cardew wrote: »

That was an argument used for the UK to give 'early adopters' stupidly high FIT rates(paid for by all electricity consumers) for sub 4kWp installations on the roof of suitable houses*.

The stupid argument then, and presumably now, was that the 'massive UK market!' was instrumental in driving down worldwide prices.

* Solar farms were not favoured then by the Guru.

Yawn! And it worked, didn't it, that's why you had to change your argument from PV being no use to the UK, to simply focusing on early FiT rates when PV subsidies rapidly undercut nuclear.

Or don't you remember how you always started your arguments with "we shouldn't have PV at all, but if we have to have it, it should be in large farms in the SW" - till everyone pointed out how costly the HVDC connections would be for your multi-GW suggestion.

Cardew

theboylard wrote: »

Hiya Cardew, back off holiday I see.

Maybe we should bin HPC, with all the subsidies/costs we'll get stung from that?

As solar and wind with battery storage is winning contracts across the world - even in solar hating Spain now - with the latest contracts having no subsidy at all, can you explain the benefit and cost advantage of HPC over a battery solution that would be massively cheaper to the economy and beneficial now to every home dweller - social housing would immediately be better off?

I could say a lot more but interested on your view?

The standard defence! - You have been indoctrinated by The Guru. In any case wouldn't HPC produced electricity - produced at night - charge batteries in every house in UK?

As I have stated for years, cheap storage of electricity will transform the market. However let that storage medium stand alone without subsidy.

Martyn1981

Cardew wrote: »

However let that storage medium stand alone without subsidy.

Does this opinion apply to nuclear too, since it's been supported for 60+yrs now, and the NDA budget for clean up is about £3bn pa for the next century.

Martyn1981

Solar2017 wrote: »

Hi all, first time poster,

Hiya again, and please don't be put off by the 'silly' posts. Mr C likes to start arguments on threads when folk ask for help and advice on PV, it's not personal, he's been doing this for 7+ years now.

So keep chatting and asking any questions that pop up.

EricMears

Cardew wrote: »

The stupid argument then, and presumably now, was that the 'massive UK market!' was instrumental in driving down worldwide prices.

But the FIT scheme (or very similar ones) applied to the whole of Europe.

Cardew

Martyn1981 wrote: »

Or don't you remember how you always started your arguments with "we shouldn't have PV at all, but if we have to have it, it should be in large farms in the SW" - till everyone pointed out how costly the HVDC connections would be for your multi-GW suggestion.

You extolled the virtues of sub-4kWp systems on houses and justified their huge subsidies, whilst arguing vehemently against solar farms.

Since then for years you have championed and posted non-stop links to bigger and bigger solar farms.

I was merely commenting that I hope the Government have learnt from the FIT debacle and don't make consumers pay similar subsidies for batteries.

Please don't bother to reply. Save your efforts for your other forums.

Martyn1981

Cardew wrote: »

You extolled the virtues of sub-4kWp systems on houses and justified their huge subsidies, whilst arguing vehemently against solar farms.

Yawn! More Cardew garbage.

Still no answer explaining your hypocritical support of nuclear subsidies .... I note, just the same lies and nonsense you've been vomitting up every 6 months or so for the last 5 yrs about me.

One could almost think it was personal, or ideological ...... but I'll just assume it's an angry old man, shouting at the world, coz he didn't get his (minority) way.

pinnks

Yawn - another thread high-jacked - the government of the day put in a subsidy, good, bad or indifferent. It proved expensive, they changed the rules. Whatever any of us think of it, it happened - such is life in a democracy. Will a later government make decisions that some think are good and others think are not - yep. Again, welcome to democracy.

Could we return to the question asked by the OP and not scare newcomers away?

zeupater

Cardew wrote: »

The standard defence! - You have been indoctrinated by The Guru. In any case wouldn't HPC produced electricity - produced at night - charge batteries in every house in UK? ...

Hi

Does that read as being support for subsidy for Nuclear+Batteries? ... odd, I thought that the historic stance was on purely on anti-subsidy morals to protect the taxpaying consumer from unnecessary costs .....

Now, what if PV+Battery could supply & charge during the day and supply at night for a considerable proportion of the year ... then what if the combination of PV+Battery not only cost less than Nuclear+Battery, but was lower than Nuclear alone ? ... now wouldn't that just be an interesting concept ...

HTH
Z

Cardew

zeupater wrote: »

Hi

Does that read as being support for subsidy for Nuclear+Batteries? ... odd, I thought that the historic stance was on purely on anti-subsidy morals to protect the taxpaying consumer from unnecessary costs .....

Now, what if PV+Battery could supply & charge during the day and supply at night for a considerable proportion of the year ... then what if the combination of PV+Battery not only cost less than Nuclear+Battery, but was lower than Nuclear alone ? ... now wouldn't that just be an interesting concept ...

HTH
Z

As I posted earlier!

As I have stated for years, cheap storage of electricity will transform the market. However let that storage medium stand alone without subsidy.

Look at my post#6 and then the reaction!

I am not arguing against battery storage, just voicing my opinion that it should not get a subsidy.