Solar options (mind field)

thegentleway

JKenH said:

thegentleway said:

Screwdriva said:

thegentleway said:

I didn't realise PW3 was compatible with IOF! I've had a PW3 for 8 months. I agree with OP that solar options are a bewildering. There's some useful youtube channels like Gary does Solar that a very helpful for getting your head round the options. 

Went live a couple months ago. I'd sign up if I were you - it's relatively straightforward now. Personally, no longer a fan of Gary since he tied up with installers on a commercial basis.

Haven't been missing out for too long then. I have signed up. Is there a way to be notified of new tariffs/changes?

I didn't realise that about Gary. I found his videos helpful and don't remember him mentioning, let alone pushing any installers.

Gary is very bullish about the financial case for investing in solar panels.



https://youtu.be/XSeiTkwfRTg?si=-9SIQW7Y2Rqj_nmQ

What's wrong with his maths?

QrizB

thegentleway said:

Gary is very bullish about the financial case for investing in solar panels.
https://youtu.be/XSeiTkwfRTg?si=-9SIQW7Y2Rqj_nmQ

What's wrong with his maths?

Its all the assumptions (risks) in the solar model that he's skipped over and ignored.

Investments in the bank are effectively risk-free. There's so much that could go wrong with his solar revenue model (not just failures with the PV kit, but structural market changes - what if electricity returns to "normal" prices and his £120pm saving becomes £60pm?) that simply isn't there with a bank account or even a global tracking fund.

He even says at 13:04 that "the risks are incredibly low" which suggests either ignorance on his part or intentional deception.

It's not quite snake oil, but it's a close to the sort of maths that were used by cowboy installers back in the 20-teens to sucker people into expensive bank finance for FIT-backed systems. There are plenty of examples in the archives of this board.

You can even see an example of it in this thread; compare the installer's calculation on page 3 with my own reproduction of it on page 4.

thegentleway

QrizB said:

thegentleway said:

Gary is very bullish about the financial case for investing in solar panels.
https://youtu.be/XSeiTkwfRTg?si=-9SIQW7Y2Rqj_nmQ

What's wrong with his maths?

Its all the assumptions (risks) in the solar model that he's skipped over and ignored.

Investments in the bank are effectively risk-free. There's so much that could go wrong with his solar revenue model (not just failures with the PV kit, but structural market changes - what if electricity returns to "normal" prices and his £120pm saving becomes £60pm?) that simply isn't there with a bank account or even a global tracking fund.

He even says at 13:04 that "the risks are incredibly low" which suggests either ignorance on his part or intentional deception.

It's not quite snake oil, but it's a close to the sort of maths that were used by cowboy installers back in the 20-teens to sucker people into expensive bank finance for FIT-backed systems. There are plenty of examples in the archives of this board.

You can even see an example of it in this thread; compare the installer's calculation on page 3 with my own reproduction of it on page 4.

You raise some valid points but “Investments in the bank” need to include stocks and shares to beat inflation and they are definitely not risk free!? 

There’s a lot that could go wrong: but the panels have a 25 year guarantee? And his model allows for replacing inverter/battery. What other failures does he need to account for?

You can reduce the saving in his model to account for structural market changes.

I agree that the risk is not incredibly low, that’s a fair point. He got a bit carried away there. 

JKenH

thegentleway said:

QrizB said:

thegentleway said:

Gary is very bullish about the financial case for investing in solar panels.
https://youtu.be/XSeiTkwfRTg?si=-9SIQW7Y2Rqj_nmQ

What's wrong with his maths?

Its all the assumptions (risks) in the solar model that he's skipped over and ignored.

Investments in the bank are effectively risk-free. There's so much that could go wrong with his solar revenue model (not just failures with the PV kit, but structural market changes - what if electricity returns to "normal" prices and his £120pm saving becomes £60pm?) that simply isn't there with a bank account or even a global tracking fund.

He even says at 13:04 that "the risks are incredibly low" which suggests either ignorance on his part or intentional deception.

It's not quite snake oil, but it's a close to the sort of maths that were used by cowboy installers back in the 20-teens to sucker people into expensive bank finance for FIT-backed systems. There are plenty of examples in the archives of this board.

You can even see an example of it in this thread; compare the installer's calculation on page 3 with my own reproduction of it on page 4.

You raise some valid points but “Investments in the bank” need to include stocks and shares to beat inflation and they are definitely not risk free!? 

There’s a lot that could go wrong: but the panels have a 25 year guarantee? And his model allows for replacing inverter/battery. What other failures does he need to account for?

You can reduce the saving in his model to account for structural market changes.

I agree that the risk is not incredibly low, that’s a fair point. He got a bit carried away there. 

Just a comment on your point - “ but the panels have a 25 year guarantee?” I am aware that many people who have solar panels (some up to 15 years) have had no problems with theirs or.There are a few of us though who are suffering degradation. The output of my panels is continually deteriorating and in reality the guarantee from the manufacturer is proving worthless. This is my thread discussing the problem from 2022. https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6335361/degradation-of-domestic-solar-panels

One string of panels on my East roof is now down to 30% of the adjacent string and on the West roof one string is down 25% compared to its neighbour.

Solar panels themselves are so cheap nowadays that when something goes wrong and one needs replacing the real cost is in the labour and scaffolding and the manufacturer is not going to cover that. Until I get scaffolding up and get an electrician who is prepared to go on the roof and check the voltage of each panel individually I don’t know which panels are at fault. The electrician would then have to report back to the manufacturer who may or not agree to replace the panels. Meanwhile the scaffolding stays up and sometime later, if I am lucky, some new panels might be sent out and the electrician can come back and replace them. 

It would be simpler and cheaper just to get the panels replaced with new ones at my own expense. You, like many others, may be lucky but there is a risk there.

thegentleway

JKenH said:

thegentleway said:

QrizB said:

thegentleway said:

Gary is very bullish about the financial case for investing in solar panels.
https://youtu.be/XSeiTkwfRTg?si=-9SIQW7Y2Rqj_nmQ

What's wrong with his maths?

Its all the assumptions (risks) in the solar model that he's skipped over and ignored.

Investments in the bank are effectively risk-free. There's so much that could go wrong with his solar revenue model (not just failures with the PV kit, but structural market changes - what if electricity returns to "normal" prices and his £120pm saving becomes £60pm?) that simply isn't there with a bank account or even a global tracking fund.

He even says at 13:04 that "the risks are incredibly low" which suggests either ignorance on his part or intentional deception.

It's not quite snake oil, but it's a close to the sort of maths that were used by cowboy installers back in the 20-teens to sucker people into expensive bank finance for FIT-backed systems. There are plenty of examples in the archives of this board.

You can even see an example of it in this thread; compare the installer's calculation on page 3 with my own reproduction of it on page 4.

You raise some valid points but “Investments in the bank” need to include stocks and shares to beat inflation and they are definitely not risk free!? 

There’s a lot that could go wrong: but the panels have a 25 year guarantee? And his model allows for replacing inverter/battery. What other failures does he need to account for?

You can reduce the saving in his model to account for structural market changes.

I agree that the risk is not incredibly low, that’s a fair point. He got a bit carried away there. 

Just a comment on your point - “ but the panels have a 25 year guarantee?” I am aware that many people who have solar panels (some up to 15 years) have had no problems with theirs or.There are a few of us though who are suffering degradation. The output of my panels is continually deteriorating and in reality the guarantee from the manufacturer is proving worthless. This is my thread discussing the problem from 2022. https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6335361/degradation-of-domestic-solar-panels

One string of panels on my East roof is now down to 30% of the adjacent string and on the West roof one string is down 25% compared to its neighbour.

Solar panels themselves are so cheap nowadays that when something goes wrong and one needs replacing the real cost is in the labour and scaffolding and the manufacturer is not going to cover that. Until I get scaffolding up and get an electrician who is prepared to go on the roof and check the voltage of each panel individually I don’t know which panels are at fault. The electrician would then have to report back to the manufacturer who may or not agree to replace the panels. Meanwhile the scaffolding stays up and sometime later, if I am lucky, some new panels might be sent out and the electrician can come back and replace them. 

It would be simpler and cheaper just to get the panels replaced with new ones at my own expense. You, like many others, may be lucky but there is a risk there.

Sorry to hear that. Sounds like you've been unlucky as all the reports of degradation are that it's lower than expected! It sounds like you have some faulty panels. Can you get a long pole and some carboard, shade one panel at a time and monitor the string voltage. Save on electrician and scaffolding.

phill2-0-0-3

he has requoted for the sharp solar panels . 
But doesn't recommend this over the other panels mentioned earlier . 

What's everyone's view this or the other ones ? 

Thanks 

QrizB

I honestly think you need to consider a different installer.

Did Screwdriva give you any contacts? Have they managed to quote yet?

Screwdriva

phill2-0-0-3 said:

he has requoted for the sharp solar panels . 
But doesn't recommend this over the other panels mentioned earlier . 

What's everyone's view this or the other ones ? 

Thanks 

I have been a huge advocate of Sharp for over 2 years but sadly all their panels have been discontinued in Europe (including the UK). A very sad result of Chinese State sponsored market flooding (I was told this when I asked the UK sales lead for Sharp).  

As a result, now obsolete panels like these are being heavily discounted to installers (< £30 a panel). I think the Eurener 500W bifacial panels I shared earlier are a much better buy. Now that you've reached out, I will make sure you receive a quote for 20 X 500W panels + PW3 for ~£13K

phill2-0-0-3

QrizB said:

I honestly think you need to consider a different installer.

Did Screwdriva give you any contacts? Have they managed to quote yet?

Spoke with him today 

phill2-0-0-3

QrizB said:

I honestly think you need to consider a different installer.

Did Screwdriva give you any contacts? Have they managed to quote yet?

Also getting 3/4 quotes regardless. 
These have just been the most responsive . 
I prefer to speak via email so I have all the details saved and proof incase of possible issues in the future.

They do offer a 25/30 year guarantee on panels . 
10 year on inverter batteries.

Presume this is standard .