The Decline Of Pv Installations
- Thread starter Harvey
- Start date
Help Support Talk Electrician Forum:
firkin joking - the SW has doubled in the last year - popping up all over the place.
Quite a few solar farms popping up my way Binky, dont what its like over your way.
Or 'greed in a field' as my mate calls them
Or 'greed in a field' as my mate calls them
farmers don't make money farming anymore, PV is a really good option for them - regular income for 20 years
the farmers get paid rental for their fields - no EU grants. All funding is FiT,or ROO-FiT based, and taken advantage of by wealth types - I had a call for some guy representing a Suadi..... So as per normal money is being drained out of the country.
And withput it your bills would go up even more - wait until the nuclear bill hits your leccy.
Renewables also help insulate us against world energy price rises. The less we import the better. Its just basic supply and demand, dwindling fossil fuel resources, increasing demand particularly from develpoing countries = even bigger price rises to come. Now throw on top of that climate changes resulting in more extreme weather, more flooding, more droughts etc etc and life is going to get very expensive.
Renewables also help insulate us against world energy price rises. The less we import the better. Its just basic supply and demand, dwindling fossil fuel resources, increasing demand particularly from develpoing countries = even bigger price rises to come. Now throw on top of that climate changes resulting in more extreme weather, more flooding, more droughts etc etc and life is going to get very expensive.
Binky the less we import, the less tax the government will take, so their only option will be to stick more tax on whatever we use.
Take Diesal it's less refined and when it first came on the market for vans it was very cheap, the the car industry latched onto it and now look where we are at. If a car could run on water they would hit it with 88% tax duty so you will never win.
PV has already been hit with less made than earlier installs, and if more have it then it will get worse, the government in this country have to make tax wherever they can.
Tax on pies that's warmed up before sale, that was a great idea NOT.
If people use less electricity then the unit price will go up so the providers still make the same profits.
Only one winner and not us.
Take Diesal it's less refined and when it first came on the market for vans it was very cheap, the the car industry latched onto it and now look where we are at. If a car could run on water they would hit it with 88% tax duty so you will never win.
PV has already been hit with less made than earlier installs, and if more have it then it will get worse, the government in this country have to make tax wherever they can.
Tax on pies that's warmed up before sale, that was a great idea NOT.
If people use less electricity then the unit price will go up so the providers still make the same profits.
Only one winner and not us.
Last edited by a moderator:
Got any figures to show how useful to the country PV output is? money making for the rich yes a answer to our energy problems no.
Not investing more in nuclear and the disposal of its waste is the problem.
Pv output is very useful to me and I'm not rich. If you think about it, all the big energy companies are rich anyway. They never should have been privatised in the first place. As for Nuclear, that is going to add £500 per annum to your bill - enjoy . I think it currently produces about 10% of our annual energy needs - have a look at OFGEM. Now how quickly has that been achieved, try building power stations, it would take 10 years or more and we need the energy NOW and PV has done this from a virtual standing start in 2 years. Ultimately it will and already is benefitting us all. Gemany has so much PV that on sunny days it drives down the wholsale electricity price across Europe.
The world is short of cheap energy, and coal pollutes the world - remember acid rain and dead lakes and rivers??? We need renewable energy in all its forms cos anything that means we don't have to import gas from Russia or the Middle east in firkin great ships has got to be good for the long term future of the country in both security and financial terms. Personally I reckon hydro, tidal and hydrogen fuel cells are better than the lot of it, but every house has a roof - why not use it? generate at point of use. The national grid wastes a whole power station in transmission losses
. I think it currently produces about 10% of our annual energy needs - have a look at OFGEM. Now how quickly has that been achieved, try building power stations, it would take 10 years or more and we need the energy NOW and PV has done this from a virtual standing start in 2 years. Ultimately it will and already is benefitting us all. Gemany has so much PV that on sunny days it drives down the wholsale electricity price across Europe.The world is short of cheap energy, and coal pollutes the world - remember acid rain and dead lakes and rivers??? We need renewable energy in all its forms cos anything that means we don't have to import gas from Russia or the Middle east in firkin great ships has got to be good for the long term future of the country in both security and financial terms. Personally I reckon hydro, tidal and hydrogen fuel cells are better than the lot of it, but every house has a roof - why not use it? generate at point of use. The national grid wastes a whole power station in transmission losses
Concur with Binky here. The idea that FiTs are paid by the general householder isn`t an informed suggestion. The cost per unit has always, and will always, go up faster & faster. Probably MINIMAL quadrupling of energy costs in the next six to eight years - NOT because those who haven`t got solar are subsidising those that have.
Yes, the FiT rate was slashed - because the pillocks in government set it stupidly high to start with; so they could make huge amount on the imports and sales. Now they`ve realised that was a baaaad idea; so the tariff is more in line with other countries - as is the cost of the kit - ergo the payback time hasn`t changed dramatically- BUT the cost to install it is a fraction of what it used to be.
Given the inexorable increases in end user purchase cost of electricity - the benefit for everyone will shift from the FiT payment, to the reduced amount of imported energy from the grid.
Lets consider.
You can buy a reasonable kit (panels & inverter) for a 4KWp system, for approx 3K. Lets say it costs you another £1500 for install, mountings, scaffolding etc.
You get 15p/ KW (approx) FiT, plus 1.5p in assumed export.
Ideally, you`ll get >3000KWh / year - but lets be take a less than ideal install, and round down to 2500KWh
So the FiT per year is 0.165 x 2500 = £ 412.50 - so, ignoring energy saved costs, 11 years payback.
Depending on your circumstances, the electric usage per year will vary - but ofgem average is 3300KWh per annum.
Now, you can`t use all of your 2500KWh to offset that - its assumed that 50% is exported, so we`ll go with that.
You have therefore saved yourself 1250KWh in generating your own leccy via PV.
This year, the average cost of a KWh of leccy is 15.4 pence, apparently.
So, the typical bill for a year is about £508.20 (.154 x 3300) ( seems very low to me, but what do I know).
But if you generated 1250KWh of that yourself, you`d only be buying 2050KWh ( £ 315.70)
Almost £ 200 per year, at current prices.
Most experts suggest that, by the turn of the decade, we`ll be approaching or beyond 0.50p per KWh.
If we re-run the same usage figures.......
3300KWh = £ 1650.00
2050KWh = £ 1020.00
Saving £ 630 per year, in just SEVEN years time - and we`ve been conservative with our estimates.
I haven`t fitted much of it in the last twelve months - but it is out there to be done - and it IS still worthwhile..
Yes, the FiT rate was slashed - because the pillocks in government set it stupidly high to start with; so they could make huge amount on the imports and sales. Now they`ve realised that was a baaaad idea; so the tariff is more in line with other countries - as is the cost of the kit - ergo the payback time hasn`t changed dramatically- BUT the cost to install it is a fraction of what it used to be.
Given the inexorable increases in end user purchase cost of electricity - the benefit for everyone will shift from the FiT payment, to the reduced amount of imported energy from the grid.
Lets consider.
You can buy a reasonable kit (panels & inverter) for a 4KWp system, for approx 3K. Lets say it costs you another £1500 for install, mountings, scaffolding etc.
You get 15p/ KW (approx) FiT, plus 1.5p in assumed export.
Ideally, you`ll get >3000KWh / year - but lets be take a less than ideal install, and round down to 2500KWh
So the FiT per year is 0.165 x 2500 = £ 412.50 - so, ignoring energy saved costs, 11 years payback.
Depending on your circumstances, the electric usage per year will vary - but ofgem average is 3300KWh per annum.
Now, you can`t use all of your 2500KWh to offset that - its assumed that 50% is exported, so we`ll go with that.
You have therefore saved yourself 1250KWh in generating your own leccy via PV.
This year, the average cost of a KWh of leccy is 15.4 pence, apparently.
So, the typical bill for a year is about £508.20 (.154 x 3300) ( seems very low to me, but what do I know).
But if you generated 1250KWh of that yourself, you`d only be buying 2050KWh ( £ 315.70)
Almost £ 200 per year, at current prices.
Most experts suggest that, by the turn of the decade, we`ll be approaching or beyond 0.50p per KWh.
If we re-run the same usage figures.......
3300KWh = £ 1650.00
2050KWh = £ 1020.00
Saving £ 630 per year, in just SEVEN years time - and we`ve been conservative with our estimates.
I haven`t fitted much of it in the last twelve months - but it is out there to be done - and it IS still worthwhile..
Jono Pashley
Well-known member
- Joined
- Oct 18, 2008
- Messages
- 1,250
- Reaction score
- 20
Concur plenty of them going on plenty of work for good installers too. Personally i dont like doing solar...
The idea that FiTs are paid by the general householder isn`t an informed suggestion
My bill is broken down and has a section for renewables i take it this means the FIT amongst other things? If its not me and everyone else who is paying the FIT?
I think PV is the weakest of all renewables. As for PV giving us independence i take it you mean on sunny days? and can we store surplus PV generation? How much is actually surplus when most householder will do all they can to stop it getting exported to get the most value for money? Figures to back any of these arguments up i have found hard to come by, I wonder why or maybe I am looking in the wrong place.
Im not talking about payback or anything like that im just saying it may well turn out the money could have been spent producing energy in a way that suited us not following europe in their approach and prop up their manufacturing selling us good they no longer need when we have a different climate and geology ( not sure if thats the right word).
My bill is broken down and has a section for renewables i take it this means the FIT amongst other things? If its not me and everyone else who is paying the FIT?
I think PV is the weakest of all renewables. As for PV giving us independence i take it you mean on sunny days? and can we store surplus PV generation? How much is actually surplus when most householder will do all they can to stop it getting exported to get the most value for money? Figures to back any of these arguments up i have found hard to come by, I wonder why or maybe I am looking in the wrong place.
Im not talking about payback or anything like that im just saying it may well turn out the money could have been spent producing energy in a way that suited us not following europe in their approach and prop up their manufacturing selling us good they no longer need when we have a different climate and geology ( not sure if thats the right word).
Fit is spread across household bills, but compared to nuclear the cost to each house is trivial - depending on who's numbers you believe PV will cost £5 to £70 per house
yer, because the householder has paid for the PV,
so those of us without it are subsidising them getting free electricity and reduced bills and a payback as well, its ill conceived IMHO.
nuclear on the other hand is paid for by everyone that uses electricity.
so those of us without it are subsidising them getting free electricity and reduced bills and a payback as well, its ill conceived IMHO.
nuclear on the other hand is paid for by everyone that uses electricity.
:C
Not seen any Domestic installs round my area for 2-3 months, but seeing commercial and farms popping up on my travels.
and a profit to EDF or whoever. It's no different, but it is rewarding those who invest thier own money in PV, no different to any other business really. Commercial tariffs are significantly lower, they profit is in shear scale. however I did see a forecast about energy rising another 50-60% over the next few years, and renewables will help offset/reduce the dependence and some of the costs associated with traditional generation methods. The reason the feeding frenzy occurred was down to setting the rewards too high, but that was done on purpose to jump start the industry. It worked a bit too well.
its rewarding people who can afford it, the rich (relatively) get richer and everyone else pays for it. I dont have a choice about paying it (unlike a business to use your example) I have to pay it much more like a tax.
Id personally have my money being invested in nuclear if thats possible, you can actually count on it rather than waiting for sunny days and then saying you are more independent on those days. I dont know enough about the grid to make a load of other assumptions but I reckon its easier to tie nuclear power stations in with pumped storage than sunny PV days and industry for base loads.
The decline was inevitable it should not come as a shock, PV will have its place still as I said loads of commercial installs going on which is where I think it is better suited, especially when it comes to architectural glass and such like whole buildings as PV panels and you cant see them seems good.
The debate here is really about energy and how we pay for it, renewables is a part of that (a small one) and PV is a part of that small section in my opinion its not the best in that small section for our country, we have alot of shore line and coast that could make use of other renewables, PV has come over from mainland europe where the climate suits and they have little shoreline. But it was a earner so people bought into it.
Underinvestment at the correct time is the real problem i think, im just not sure the energy companies earn more from investing in power stations or just shafting the customer at every possible opportunity so why would they invest im sure they earn the same either way?!
Id personally have my money being invested in nuclear if thats possible, you can actually count on it rather than waiting for sunny days and then saying you are more independent on those days. I dont know enough about the grid to make a load of other assumptions but I reckon its easier to tie nuclear power stations in with pumped storage than sunny PV days and industry for base loads.
The decline was inevitable it should not come as a shock, PV will have its place still as I said loads of commercial installs going on which is where I think it is better suited, especially when it comes to architectural glass and such like whole buildings as PV panels and you cant see them seems good.
The debate here is really about energy and how we pay for it, renewables is a part of that (a small one) and PV is a part of that small section in my opinion its not the best in that small section for our country, we have alot of shore line and coast that could make use of other renewables, PV has come over from mainland europe where the climate suits and they have little shoreline. But it was a earner so people bought into it.
Underinvestment at the correct time is the real problem i think, im just not sure the energy companies earn more from investing in power stations or just shafting the customer at every possible opportunity so why would they invest im sure they earn the same either way?!
