Should I go off-grid?

Reed_Richards

So don't take your electric car to the scrap heap and put it in one of those huge car crushers?

HertsLad

Reed_Richards said:

So don't take your electric car to the scrap heap and put it in one of those huge car crushers?

I guess they might not follow the same procedure for electric cars unless the batteries are removed first. And I think they probably are removed because there is a market for used lithium car batteries,

HertsLad

A few people have suggested Octopus Energy as a good provider for exporting surplus solar energy. I looked at their website this morning and can't see how I could possibly make it pay. At present, I pay zero for electricity including no standing charge. But to sign up to Octopus, I would need to pay their standing charge of £175 per annum. If energy was exported at 15p per kwh, I would need to export 1.2kwh just to break even. Maybe I could, but it would really cut into any revenue stream. But there would be other huge costs which really make it a complete non-starter, like certification costs and an electrician for connecting my solar panels and battery based system to the grid, plus an expensive grid-tie inverter which is then running 24/7, sapping energy.  

Anyone who bought into solar panels about 20 years ago and signed up for huge payments for exports was, and still is, on to a winner, funded by the rest of us. So unfair. But more recent installations where you contact solar firms and have them set everything up is so expensive, I suggest, when compared to a DIY approach. The payback period is not viable if a couple of quotes I obtained is anything to go by.

EricMears

HertsLad said:

A few people have suggested Octopus Energy as a good provider for exporting surplus solar energy. I looked at their website this morning and can't see how I could possibly make it pay. At present, I pay zero for electricity including no standing charge. But to sign up to Octopus, I would need to pay their standing charge of £175 per annum. If energy was exported at 15p per kwh, I would need to export 1.2kwh just to break even. Maybe I could, but it would really cut into any revenue stream. But there would be other huge costs which really make it a complete non-starter, like certification costs and an electrician for connecting my solar panels and battery based system to the grid, plus an expensive grid-tie inverter which is then running 24/7, sapping energy.  

Anyone who bought into solar panels about 20 years ago and signed up for huge payments for exports was, and still is, on to a winner, funded by the rest of us. So unfair. But more recent installations where you contact solar firms and have them set everything up is so expensive, I suggest, when compared to a DIY approach. The payback period is not viable if a couple of quotes I obtained is anything to go by.

Why "unfair"  ?    Scheme was widely advertised and attracted many people who did the basic arithmetic and joined up.

HertsLad

EricMears said:

HertsLad said:

Anyone who bought into solar panels about 20 years ago and signed up for huge payments for exports was, and still is, on to a winner, funded by the rest of us. So unfair. But more recent installations where you contact solar firms and have them set everything up is so expensive, I suggest, when compared to a DIY approach. The payback period is not viable if a couple of quotes I obtained is anything to go by.

Why "unfair"  ?    Scheme was widely advertised and attracted many people who did the basic arithmetic and joined up.

I agree when you say it was "widely advertised and attracted many people who did the basic arithmetic and joined up." I think it was unfair because it transferred wealth from people who don't have very much money, to those who do. People who could afford the investment went ahead and looked forward to quite a rapid payback with good returns. Most people, including me, did not sign up but ended up funding the FIT payments through levies placed on our energy bills.

I assume the idea was to kick start the idea of putting solar panels on roofs to generate electricity. I don't understand why the FIT payments were set at such a high level, and are still being paid, presumably.

paul991

I signed up to  FIT  and don't have  much money.The  FIT  payments were a bribe to get people to take a chance on non proven tech in much the same way as Heat pumps and Evs are promoted today.I will not mention where your electricity payments go to as this is not a political forum.

EricMears

HertsLad said:

EricMears said:

HertsLad said:

Anyone who bought into solar panels about 20 years ago and signed up for huge payments for exports was, and still is, on to a winner, funded by the rest of us. So unfair. But more recent installations where you contact solar firms and have them set everything up is so expensive, I suggest, when compared to a DIY approach. The payback period is not viable if a couple of quotes I obtained is anything to go by.

Why "unfair"  ?    Scheme was widely advertised and attracted many people who did the basic arithmetic and joined up.

I agree when you say it was "widely advertised and attracted many people who did the basic arithmetic and joined up." I think it was unfair because it transferred wealth from people who don't have very much money, to those who do. People who could afford the investment went ahead and looked forward to quite a rapid payback with good returns. Most people, including me, did not sign up but ended up funding the FIT payments through levies placed on our energy bills.

I assume the idea was to kick start the idea of putting solar panels on roofs to generate electricity. I don't understand why the FIT payments were set at such a high level, and are still being paid, presumably.

As I posted at the time,  anyone who had a mortgage would have been able to increase it to cover purchase price of a solar system.

"Transferring wealth from people who don't have very much money, to those who do" isn't a very 'fair' description.   Everyone paying an electricity bill has to pay 'extra' to cover all the 'green initiatives' whether it's my 4kWp roof or a few GW of windfarm

silverwhistle

HertsLad said:

I assume the idea was to kick start the idea of putting solar panels on roofs to generate electricity. I don't understand why the FIT payments were set at such a high level, and are still being paid, presumably.

I agree there, the initial levels were very high, but remember there was a taper as take up increased. The theory amongst the PV business at the time was that the rates were needlessly high and  that the government at the time wanted to point at PV and say "look how expensive". As it is they ignored the taper to nothing and cut it off abruptly before planned, thus ruining the business for years and bankrupting many suppliers.

I used some rainy day savings and purchased a cheap car (as ever) to help pay for mine. Other people on similar or higher incomes made different spending choices and didn't get them.

zeupater

silverwhistle said:

HertsLad said:

I assume the idea was to kick start the idea of putting solar panels on roofs to generate electricity. I don't understand why the FIT payments were set at such a high level, and are still being paid, presumably.

I agree there, the initial levels were very high, but remember there was a taper as take up increased. The theory amongst the PV business at the time was that the rates were needlessly high and  that the government at the time wanted to point at PV and say "look how expensive". As it is they ignored the taper to nothing and cut it off abruptly before planned, thus ruining the business for years and bankrupting many suppliers.

I used some rainy day savings and purchased a cheap car (as ever) to help pay for mine. Other people on similar or higher incomes made different spending choices and didn't get them.

Hi

.... plus, don't forget that the FiT scheme was introduced before manufacturing & supply economies of scale had any real impact on prices .... if these hadn't kick-started a competitive global industry we'd likely still be looking at a typical 4kWp system costing ~£20k in 2010 (when the original FiT was set), would be now be around £30k when CPI inflation is considered (actually £30027.29 according to BoE!!) ....

As such, current prices of systems seem to be pretty competitive at ~1/6 of the potential cost if no action had been taken globally .... another way of looking at it would be to consider the current return based on exporting at 15p/kWh (as per HL's post) would need to be closer to 90p if prices hadn't fallen, which would be unlikely as it's ~4x the current unit cost for electricity supply!! ...

The logical question should really revolve around whether an off grid system, whether DIY or not, would be financially viable (vs grid connected) if the cost of panels and inverters were based on updated 2010 economics .... as it stands the answer would almost certainly be no, so the prospect of relative fairness becomes pretty moot in my book, especially when considering the subject of the thread ... 

HTH - Z

HertsLad

I had been using 4 lithium batteries from Eco Worthy at 12.8v 100ah each to power my fridge and freezer. They were, and still are, about £230 each. Better known brands are even more expensive. Recently I noticed 'generic' batteries (same size) for only £169 each, so I bought 2 of those to increase the battery bank size to 6 batteries. i Have no reason to think my new batteries will perform any differently to the Eco Worthy or better known brands of battery. I guess battery packs designed specifically for houses with solar panels, e.g. Pylontech, are vastly more expensive for broadly the same energy storage capacity. What do you think? Have I made a wise choice as a money saver or am I asking for trouble?