Your browser isn't supported
It looks like you're using an old web browser. To get the most out of the site and to ensure guides display correctly, we suggest upgrading your browser now. Download the latest:

Welcome to the MSE Forums

We're home to a fantastic community of MoneySavers but anyone can post. Please exercise caution & report spam, illegal, offensive or libellous posts/messages: click "report" or email forumteam@.

Search
  • FIRST POST
    • zeupater
    • By zeupater 7th Jan 13, 5:36 PM
    • 4,960Posts
    • 6,716Thanks
    zeupater
    Solar ... In the news
    • #1
    • 7th Jan 13, 5:36 PM
    Solar ... In the news 7th Jan 13 at 5:36 PM
    Hi All

    Thought it was about time we had a thread specifically to discuss relevant press articles relating to solar pv & thermal ..... so here goes ...

    Z
    Last edited by zeupater; 07-01-2013 at 5:48 PM.
    "We are what we repeatedly do, excellence then is not an act, but a habit. " ...... Aristotle
Page 124
    • pile-o-stone
    • By pile-o-stone 20th May 19, 9:00 AM
    • 305 Posts
    • 489 Thanks
    pile-o-stone
    The main issue with the public ownership of companies like BT, British Gas, British Rail, etc. was lack of investment. The profits from these companies went into the public purse and was spent elsewhere.

    The only way re-nationalising companies will work is if they are financially ring fenced where the profits remain with those companies and are reinvested in infrastructure, training and pay.
    5.18 kWp PV systems (3.68 E/W & 1.5 E).
    Solar iBoost+ to two immersion heaters on 300L thermal store.
    Vegan household with 100% composted food waste
    Mini orchard planted and vegetable allotment created.
    • 1961Nick
    • By 1961Nick 20th May 19, 11:16 AM
    • 1,131 Posts
    • 3,694 Thanks
    1961Nick
    The main issue with the public ownership of companies like BT, British Gas, British Rail, etc. was lack of investment. The profits from these companies went into the public purse and was spent elsewhere.

    The only way re-nationalising companies will work is if they are financially ring fenced where the profits remain with those companies and are reinvested in infrastructure, training and pay.
    Originally posted by pile-o-stone
    Is the debt that is created by taking these companies into public ownership also ring fenced? If so, that debt will need servicing & the cost could be more, less or the same as paying dividends to shareholders. Perhaps I should ask Diane Abbott?
    4kWp (black/black) - Sofar Inverter - SSE(141°) - 30° pitch - North Lincs
    Installed June 2013 - PVGIS = 3400

    Sofar ME3000SP Inverter & 5 x Pylontech US2000B Plus Batteries - 12kWh
    • Martyn1981
    • By Martyn1981 20th May 19, 11:49 AM
    • 9,666 Posts
    • 14,556 Thanks
    Martyn1981
    The main issue with the public ownership of companies like BT, British Gas, British Rail, etc. was lack of investment. The profits from these companies went into the public purse and was spent elsewhere.

    The only way re-nationalising companies will work is if they are financially ring fenced where the profits remain with those companies and are reinvested in infrastructure, training and pay.
    Originally posted by pile-o-stone
    The lack of investment is very true, and I suspect because whichever party was in power, didn't want to be seen as the one impacting our bills ...... and then our votes.

    Now when energy bills go up, the government 'slags off' the companies, which is a way of raising bills, and raising votes.

    I have a small amount of personal experience, as I worked for the Environment Division of the Welsh Office just after water privatisation. Folk will recall bills rising massively. The water companies had 5yr 'K's', a percentage above inflation that they could raise bills by. These would be reviewed each 5yrs, but something like a 5%k on top of 2% or 3% inflation, adds up very fast. Again, I suspect we all remember this.

    But, I also got to see the other side of it, with storm overflows from sewerage to rivers being steadily removed, the building of massive sewage treatment works, Swansea (day out for us, I kid you not ..... wow the smell!), Cardiff, Barry Bathing Waters etc, all in the region of £50m. Before this, sewage was stored in tanks, having simply gone through some metal screens to remove large debris, then discharged through short(ish) sea outfall pipes at high tide. After the treatment plants (including catching and using methane) a clear liquid resembling water (but I wouldn't suggest drinking it) was discharged via long sea outfall pipes.

    I'm sure there has been a lot of profit making from privatisation, but national ownership combined with political fears over bill rises is a bad combination. If such a route is taken then long (5yr+) cross party agreements should be made on bills, so no party can use them to win votes, or knock other parties, or fear good investment.
    Last edited by Martyn1981; 20-05-2019 at 11:51 AM.
    Mart. Cardiff. 5.58 kWp PV systems (3.58 ESE & 2.0 WNW)

    For general PV advice please see the PV FAQ thread on the Green & Ethical Board.
    • Martyn1981
    • By Martyn1981 20th May 19, 11:59 AM
    • 9,666 Posts
    • 14,556 Thanks
    Martyn1981
    If such a route is taken then long (5yr+) cross party agreements should be made on bills, so no party can use them to win votes, or knock other parties, or fear good investment.
    Originally posted by Martyn1981
    Just thought of a good example. In the US they have a 'gas tax' on petrol and diesel. This money goes toward infrastructure such as highways, bridges etc.

    In the US, no party wants to mention raising gas tax, as they'd be the party that 'hates America' given that Americans love cars and driving.

    The result is crumbling infrastructure due to under-investment - all parties agree. The solution (or part of the solution) is to raise the gas tax - all parties agree. Raising the tax would be 'bad' for the party in charge at the time - all parties agree.

    So the solution outcome - the tax of 18.4c/gall(US) hasn't been raised since 1993, despite inflation from 1993-2018 totaling 73%.

    It seems to me that most governments are run by people who fear irrational voters, especially if they have loud voices. Plus the US also suffers from most politicians (especially Republicans) getting millions from FF interests for campaign funding (not bribes ).
    Mart. Cardiff. 5.58 kWp PV systems (3.58 ESE & 2.0 WNW)

    For general PV advice please see the PV FAQ thread on the Green & Ethical Board.
    • KevinG
    • By KevinG 20th May 19, 12:22 PM
    • 1,585 Posts
    • 4,661 Thanks
    KevinG
    So the solution outcome - the tax of 18.4c/gall(US) hasn't been raised since 1993, despite inflation from 1993-2018 totaling 73%.
    Originally posted by Martyn1981
    It hasn't been raised for nine years here either, for similar reasons.
    Baxi Ecogen 24/1.0 Micro-CHP boiler installed Oct-2010; 2kWp Solar PV - 10*200W Kioto, SMA Sunny Boy 2000HF, SSE facing, some shading in winter, 37° pitch, installed Jun-2011, inverter replaced Sep-2017.
    • EricMears
    • By EricMears 20th May 19, 12:52 PM
    • 2,575 Posts
    • 4,459 Thanks
    EricMears
    We of course used to have the "Road Fund Licence" - a payment in respect of every car hypothecated for provision & maintenance of roads. The name got changed when successive governments realised they could divert the proceeds wherever they wanted.
    NE Derbyshire.
    4kWp S Facing 17.5deg slope (dormer roof).
    • GreatApe
    • By GreatApe 21st May 19, 4:01 PM
    • 4,023 Posts
    • 2,979 Thanks
    GreatApe
    The main issue with the public ownership of companies like BT, British Gas, British Rail, etc. was lack of investment. The profits from these companies went into the public purse and was spent elsewhere.

    The only way re-nationalising companies will work is if they are financially ring fenced where the profits remain with those companies and are reinvested in infrastructure, training and pay.
    Originally posted by pile-o-stone

    The actual problem with nationalized companies is they have an incentive to be inefficient

    I used to work for British steel at a site that had 30,000 men working
    It was then privatized and the all but around 4,000 workers were fired while production actually went up

    What this means is that in state hands 26,000 men were hired just to pretend to work
    you had workers who had helpers whos only jobs were to carry their tools
    You had workers who would come in, have nothing to do, sleep for a 12 hour shift, then go home

    etc

    Can a company be nationalized and not fall into the same lazy inefficient practices that existed in the past? Perhaps the government could take over utilities etc and just keep them as separate private companies and just own 85% + of the shares in the company like France does with EDF

    Maybe this could work if they funded the purchase of the shares with 2% coupon gilts and got 5% dividends as a result. Spending £100 billion would provide a net £3 billion profit assuming Diane abbot the chancellor could resist meddling. There would be no price cut for customers or improved service or more investment just a simple arbitrage of gilts vs dividends

    Actually the saving would be less as you'd have £3 billion less flowing to dividend would have to pay dividend taxes so maybe closer to £2 billion net

    Overall I dont think its a worthwhile en devour especially as the MPs would not be able to resist making things worse with political decisions rather than business or engineering or productivity deciisons
    • Martyn1981
    • By Martyn1981 22nd May 19, 12:08 PM
    • 9,666 Posts
    • 14,556 Thanks
    Martyn1981
    US solar plus storage prices beating coal and new build gas. Savings for the energy firms and customers when switching to RE.

    Affordable solar-plus-storage ‘hard to beat’ for coal

    According to IEEFA, PacifiCorp’s coal units can’t compete with “cheaper and cleaner alternatives” despite their high power performance levels. For the firm – reportedly the largest grid operator in the US West – the savings from early closures could reach the US$248 million mark, depending on scenarios.
    According to the review led by Fluence, utilities opting for solar-plus-storage can expect lower LCOEs (US$39-US$48/MWh) than comparable mid-merit NGCC plants (US$60-$116/MWh). For reference, some of PacifiCorp’s coal units feature LCOEs above the US$85/MWh threshold, based on the firm’s own stats.
    Mart. Cardiff. 5.58 kWp PV systems (3.58 ESE & 2.0 WNW)

    For general PV advice please see the PV FAQ thread on the Green & Ethical Board.
    • Martyn1981
    • By Martyn1981 26th May 19, 11:53 AM
    • 9,666 Posts
    • 14,556 Thanks
    Martyn1981
    France is planning a big growth in PV. They are aiming to double capacity to 20GW by 2023, then add a further 24GW by 2028. That second period is a seriously large annual growth. Nice.

    The weekend read: Preparing for take-off
    Mart. Cardiff. 5.58 kWp PV systems (3.58 ESE & 2.0 WNW)

    For general PV advice please see the PV FAQ thread on the Green & Ethical Board.
    • zeupater
    • By zeupater 26th May 19, 1:12 PM
    • 4,960 Posts
    • 6,716 Thanks
    zeupater
    France is planning a big growth in PV. They are aiming to double capacity to 20GW by 2023, then add a further 24GW by 2028. That second period is a seriously large annual growth. Nice.

    The weekend read: Preparing for take-off
    Originally posted by Martyn1981
    Hi

    Does that mean that every time someone tries to convince us that we shouldn't be looking to build more PV capacity in the UK but instead follow the energy generation source strategy used in France, we have little option available other than to shrug our shoulders & chuckle at the hypocrisy and total strategic misreading that agreement would involve? ...

    .... For the times they are a-changin' ...

    HTH
    Z
    Last edited by zeupater; 26-05-2019 at 1:15 PM. Reason: +?
    "We are what we repeatedly do, excellence then is not an act, but a habit. " ...... Aristotle
    • Martyn1981
    • By Martyn1981 26th May 19, 2:18 PM
    • 9,666 Posts
    • 14,556 Thanks
    Martyn1981
    Hi

    Does that mean that every time someone tries to convince us that we shouldn't be looking to build more PV capacity in the UK but instead follow the energy generation source strategy used in France, we have little option available other than to shrug our shoulders & chuckle at the hypocrisy and total strategic misreading that agreement would involve? ...

    .... For the times they are a-changin' ...

    HTH
    Z
    Originally posted by zeupater
    So much fuss over just a couple of letters - fission, fusion, how different can they possibly be?
    Mart. Cardiff. 5.58 kWp PV systems (3.58 ESE & 2.0 WNW)

    For general PV advice please see the PV FAQ thread on the Green & Ethical Board.
    • GreatApe
    • By GreatApe 26th May 19, 11:08 PM
    • 4,023 Posts
    • 2,979 Thanks
    GreatApe
    France is planning a big growth in PV. They are aiming to double capacity to 20GW by 2023, then add a further 24GW by 2028. That second period is a seriously large annual growth. Nice.

    The weekend read: Preparing for take-off
    Originally posted by Martyn1981

    This shows the gross hypocrisy/ignorance (choose which one) of the green movement

    France already covers in excess of 100% of its own electrical needs in the summer via clean nuclear/hydro. Building PV plants is just creating waste in the manufacture and process of these systems and in time in the decommissioning of them

    For instance today in France was just 1% Fossil fuel for its grid. So what is the point in building mass PV farms in France just to waste time resources money and to generate waste in producing and building these systems??

    But it will benefit the UK we will soon have 5.4 GW links to France and possibly another 2GW on top of that. So all this excess will help green the UK grid. Its a good thing the UK is going to build little to no additional solar we can just import the massive French surplus with the 7.4GW + Links we will have with them
    • michaels
    • By michaels 27th May 19, 4:53 PM
    • 22,924 Posts
    • 104,777 Thanks
    michaels
    This shows the gross hypocrisy/ignorance (choose which one) of the green movement

    France already covers in excess of 100% of its own electrical needs in the summer via clean nuclear/hydro. Building PV plants is just creating waste in the manufacture and process of these systems and in time in the decommissioning of them

    For instance today in France was just 1% Fossil fuel for its grid. So what is the point in building mass PV farms in France just to waste time resources money and to generate waste in producing and building these systems??

    But it will benefit the UK we will soon have 5.4 GW links to France and possibly another 2GW on top of that. So all this excess will help green the UK grid. Its a good thing the UK is going to build little to no additional solar we can just import the massive French surplus with the 7.4GW + Links we will have with them
    Originally posted by GreatApe
    Aren't any of their nuclear fleet reaching the end of their life? Have they had any success with building new ones?
    Cool heads and compromise
    • Martyn1981
    • By Martyn1981 27th May 19, 5:27 PM
    • 9,666 Posts
    • 14,556 Thanks
    Martyn1981
    Aren't any of their nuclear fleet reaching the end of their life? Have they had any success with building new ones?
    Originally posted by michaels
    Loads reaching end of life.

    Flamanville is successful if you support renewables, as it's billions over budget, a decade behind target, and will be switched on with a faulty reactor lid (then shut back down again) just to prevent a clause that would allow the UK to withdraw credit guarantees on HPC. It's failure, and that of the same design in Finland, and the huges cost and delays of the same design being deployed in Hinkley have helped enormously in proving that the sun is now setting on nuclear's day.

    France is building out RE, because nuclear is too expensive. Given that France is the 'expert' on nuclear, having such a high percentage of generation from it (the US has more reactors), I think we should listen to them, when they conclude that nuclear is now a busted flush .... economically.
    Mart. Cardiff. 5.58 kWp PV systems (3.58 ESE & 2.0 WNW)

    For general PV advice please see the PV FAQ thread on the Green & Ethical Board.
    • Martyn1981
    • By Martyn1981 27th May 19, 5:29 PM
    • 9,666 Posts
    • 14,556 Thanks
    Martyn1981
    More news today on the massive potential of PV in France (quicker and cheaper than nuclear, and far lower FF emissions than nuclear (yes I did say that)).

    French energy agency says ‘neglected’ areas offer 53 GW of PV potential
    Mart. Cardiff. 5.58 kWp PV systems (3.58 ESE & 2.0 WNW)

    For general PV advice please see the PV FAQ thread on the Green & Ethical Board.
    • Martyn1981
    • By Martyn1981 28th May 19, 4:09 PM
    • 9,666 Posts
    • 14,556 Thanks
    Martyn1981
    Some (more) testing of adding/gluing thin film PV to existing structures:

    Heliatek and Lechwerke test PV facade on grain silo

    The two companies have glued 230 square meters of solar film to the rough concrete surface of a grain silo in Donauwörth, Germany. The film is expected to generate approximately 6,700 kWh kilowatt-hours of solar power per year. Lechwerke and Heliatek want to open up new potential for the use of PV on other surfaces with the pilot project.

    Includes a description that only a Brit could follow without getting a headache - "The 120 Heliatek solar films are six meters long and 32 inches wide. They were attached to the grain silo at a height of about 20 meters."
    Mart. Cardiff. 5.58 kWp PV systems (3.58 ESE & 2.0 WNW)

    For general PV advice please see the PV FAQ thread on the Green & Ethical Board.
    • GreatApe
    • By GreatApe 28th May 19, 5:05 PM
    • 4,023 Posts
    • 2,979 Thanks
    GreatApe
    Aren't any of their nuclear fleet reaching the end of their life? Have they had any success with building new ones?
    Originally posted by michaels
    They dont need any new nukes they just need to keep their old nukes going the cost of which will be significantly lower than building new nukes. They are going to close two reactors shortly but that will be offset by the EPR that starts up.

    But the point is right now they have excess nuclear during the summer so any PV deployment just cuts into marginal nuclear generation which is by far the greenest power much more so than building and deploying PV farms in France

    Economically and environmentally it makes no sense (unless you are the people being paid to do this) it is literally digging holes to fill them back up again

    Wind power is not quite the same.
    At least with wind power in France the majority is produced in the winter when it can displace some CCGT fired power
    • GreatApe
    • By GreatApe 28th May 19, 5:09 PM
    • 4,023 Posts
    • 2,979 Thanks
    GreatApe
    More news today on the massive potential of PV in France (quicker and cheaper than nuclear, and far lower FF emissions than nuclear
    Originally posted by Martyn1981
    The french are not making a choice for PV or new nuclear, they are making a choice for PV displacing existing nuclear output and just running a few more grams in an existing reactor is probably at least one, if not multiple orders of magnitude more green and less wasteful

    Also like with CCGTs ramping up and down more means less thermal efficiency so there probably wont even be a uranium saving in these PV

    It is truly digging holes to fill them back up again
    • GreatApe
    • By GreatApe 28th May 19, 5:19 PM
    • 4,023 Posts
    • 2,979 Thanks
    GreatApe
    Loads reaching end of life.

    Flamanville is successful if you support renewables, as it's billions over budget, a decade behind target, and will be switched on with a faulty reactor lid (then shut back down again) just to prevent a clause that would allow the UK to withdraw credit guarantees on HPC. It's failure, and that of the same design in Finland, and the huges cost and delays of the same design being deployed in Hinkley have helped enormously in proving that the sun is now setting on nuclear's day.

    France is building out RE, because nuclear is too expensive. Given that France is the 'expert' on nuclear, having such a high percentage of generation from it (the US has more reactors), I think we should listen to them, when they conclude that nuclear is now a busted flush .... economically.
    Originally posted by Martyn1981

    You are reporting fake news, the French will close 2 reactors and replace the output with the EPR that will come online

    They will for at least the next 2 decades still be a major nuclear power producer and French retail electricity prices are Half the Price of German retail prices and significantly cleaner too

    France did not have to build the EPR it was pointless they already have an excess of nuclear so much so that they could charge tens of millions of EVs without building more power stations just operating the nukes at higher CFs

    The additional links being built to France (3.4GW UK to France also a 1.4?GW link to italy) will also help them export more nuclear power and green further their neighbors grids
    • GreatApe
    • By GreatApe 28th May 19, 5:32 PM
    • 4,023 Posts
    • 2,979 Thanks
    GreatApe
    France is building out RE, because nuclear is too expensive. Given that France is the 'expert' on nuclear, having such a high percentage of generation from it (the US has more reactors), I think we should listen to them, when they conclude that nuclear is now a busted flush .... economically.
    Originally posted by Martyn1981

    Errrr.....No

    New nuclear has been a busted flush since the 1990s not just recently and not due to wind or PV but because of CCGTs and plentiful abundant cheap NG

    New nuclear could not compete with CCGTs which are 1/10th the size, 1/20th the cost, come online in 1/5th the time and require 1/15th the workforce to run once built

    And realistically it is even worse than that, it is not new nuclear vs new CCGTs but new nuclear vs EXISTING CCGTS which puts their economics into an even worse position

    So should new nukes be built in the UK or Germany or the USA? No
    No not on economic grounds and in the UK not on CO2 grounds either (since by 2023 we will be mostly non fossil anyway so there is no need for mass build out of nuclear or solar in the uk from today onward)

    But existing nukes should be kept open where economic (and they should be offered at least the same offer as the lowest paid CFD to wind farms per year so if wind farms get cheaper the CFD for nuclear should go down to match that) and that probably means the French should keep their nukes for at least until 2040 and perhaps to 2060 if not more
Welcome to our new Forum!

Our aim is to save you money quickly and easily. We hope you like it!

Forum Team Contact us

Live Stats

599Posts Today

6,381Users online

Martin's Twitter