# Solar Photovoltiacs



## Stuart Davies (Jan 13, 2008)

Some members here who know me well enough will also know that I cashed in my most of my watches before Christmas for house improvements that also included solar electric panels which were installed at the beginning of February. It's not a big system - just 1.41kWp which should in theory generate approximately 1000kWh/year - so with export of 3.1p/kW; Feed in Tariff of 43.3p/kW and some behavioural changes (e.g. doing the laundry during the day whist electricity is being generated generated instead of buying it at night) I should stand to make approx Â£500/year.










The inverter:










If anyone is thinking of investing into renewable energy either through electricity generation (Feed in Tariffs) or heat generation (Renewable Heat Incentive) then I'd be happy to give some quick advise (it's what I doing for a living)  Stu


----------



## MarkF (Jul 5, 2003)

I am trying to get my son interested in the renewable energy sector, not that he is interested. 

Be interested, in 12 months time, to know what the actual saving was Stuart.


----------



## pg tips (May 16, 2003)

A few year ago I did a loft conversion and looked into this as we have a perfect south facing roof and as I was working up there and installation would have been a doddle at the time. Doing the maths it worked out that it would roughly take 20 years to get to the break even point where I'd have actually got the cost of installation back. At the time we were planning to move in 5 years so it just didn't make financial sense as we'd be paying all the upfront cost for someone else to save money in the future.

As it happens we haven't moved so maybe I should have done it. But I still can't get my head round spending 10-15K up front to save max 500 a year.


----------



## Stuart Davies (Jan 13, 2008)

Thanks for replies and the PM's about this thread - I will endevor to reply to each of you over the next few days so please bear with me as spare time is pecious at the moment. Stu


----------



## Stuart Davies (Jan 13, 2008)

8 months and 6 days since these panels have been installed I have today hit my predicted yield of 1060 kWh generated. Anything produced from now until next February is just a nice little bonus! Miss the Seadweller? Naaah!


----------



## Ryan P (Sep 20, 2011)

Hi Stuart

As I'm new to this forum, I was just having a general browse around & came across your topic. I would have contacted you by pm, but I'm not permitted to as yet.

I'm currently mulling over the pros & cons of having a 4Kw pv system installed on my house & have a couple of reservations regarding fixings/reliability/performance/forecast/pay-back/etc figures quoted by the companies who've tendered.

I was just wondering if you'd mind in giving me a brief appraisal of your experiences with regard to your system, re; equipment, installation, performance, etc.

Many thanks

Cheers

R


----------



## Stuart Davies (Jan 13, 2008)

Ryan I would be prepared to run this over with our PV calculator for you but I am not prepared to put my personal email address on a public forum. Can I suggest you google search my name next to the company I work for which is Severn Wye EA and you find me through there.


----------



## Ryan P (Sep 20, 2011)

Hi Stuart

Thanks for the offer, will do.

Cheers

R


----------



## Stuart Davies (Jan 13, 2008)

Worrying :angry:


----------



## Ryan P (Sep 20, 2011)

Stuart Davies said:


> Worrying


Yes indeed, well that's killed that off then


----------



## Stuart Davies (Jan 13, 2008)

Ryan P said:


> Stuart Davies said:
> 
> 
> > Worrying
> ...


Ouch!

Just get in there now Ryan BEFORE cut off!


----------



## GASHEAD (Aug 27, 2009)

I can't believe how incredibly shortsighted the proposed changes are.


----------



## Rotundus (May 7, 2012)

was talking about this earlier.

not good at all. this will probably put me out of work as i am self employed sales but work solely for one contracting firm.

moving on from the current cavity and loft insulation funded schemes to the "shot between the eyes" domestic pv market.

shame as i had been working for a large multinational firm who are about to introduce domestic fuel cell technology to the UK.

however at less than 1 KW these systems are not as viable in the UK as they are in Asia.

Stu, whats that by the way about 6 or 8 m2 of cells up there?


----------



## Stuart Davies (Jan 13, 2008)

desmondus rotundus said:


> Stu, whats that by the way about 6 or 8 m2 of cells up there?


Errr not sure actually Des - they are Yingli panels and the system is 1.41kWp in size. Out of curiosity why do you ask? If it is urgent then I'll look it up...


----------



## BondandBigM (Apr 4, 2007)

Stuart Davies said:


> Worrying :angry:


Are you surprised, funding something with taxpayers money, a good number of which will never be able to buy into, for leccy when there will be old biddies sitting in their houses freezing this winter. It's of next to no use to your average low income householder anyway and even less accessible. Better that money went to easing their plight than you guys bragging about making a couple of hundred taxpayer funded quids a year.

IMHO of course as always :lol: :lol:


----------



## Stan (Aug 7, 2003)

I have to agree with Bond on this, if you are looking at Solar PV technology to make a bob or two, youâ€™ve done so for the wrong reason. IMO.

My car is less used than it used to be, I use a 3W solar panel to maintain its battery in Summer (and Winter). The amount of charge balance is much less capable in Winter of course. Not a very efficient way to preserve the life of a little used, sixty quid car battery; but it maintains its ready availability to start the engine.

I use a solar battery charger to maintain my LSD AA cells all year long, It keeps them available to use and fully capable despite their â€œclaimedâ€ 75% storage capability after six or twelve months of storage.

I doubt most Solar adopters will recoup their outlay in the real world, and I hope most of those who bought it as a way of making money get a reality check, sooner, rather than later.

Solar technology costs money; but it has its uses. If the cost of it to you has benefits, thatâ€™s good.

I donâ€™t want to subsides your pipe dream, when eligible (those who paid into it for at least 34 years) state pensioners are unable to meet the cost of their inflated heating bills. 

Nice house, nice solar panels, your choice.


----------



## handlehall (Aug 7, 2009)

And apart from the estimated 9% this typically ill thought - out scheme has added to electricity bills, I doubt very much that the reduction in carbon emissions takes into account the energy used to transport raw materials, manufacture and install these systems.

Unless technology takes a huge leap forward in the future renewables are only ever going to be a bit part player.

Looking forward to the next scheme though - anaerobic digesters in every backyard - complete with livestock to feed it?


----------



## Stuart Davies (Jan 13, 2008)

:lol: you lot crack me up and clearly don't know me at all. I NEVER installed these panels as a means to 'make' money - my motives sirs are VERY different. However, I do acknowledge that money is and will be a motive for most so if that is what floats your boat then I will sing from the rooftops (pun) to get the energy revolution started.

And don't give me that embodied energy [email protected] - your insight is somewhat clouded  How is your carbon footprint on that last bannana you or that bowl of rice you ate or that flight for that holiday - double standards...sigh


----------



## Stan (Aug 7, 2003)

Stuart Davies said:


> :lol: you lot crack me up and clearly don't know me at all. I NEVER installed these panels as a means to 'make' money - my motives sirs are VERY different. However, I do acknowledge that money is and will be a motive for most so if that is what floats your boat then I will sing from the rooftops (pun) to get the energy revolution started.
> 
> And don't give me that embodied energy [email protected] - your insight is somewhat clouded  How is your carbon footprint on that last bannana you or that bowl of rice you ate or that flight for that holiday - double standards...sigh


Stu,

Iâ€™m not criticising YOU; let me make that clear.

I donâ€™t know what your motive is, but Iâ€™d like to know what your goal is.

One thing I would guess, is that the energy sellers/ retailers donâ€™t have any respect for either of us?

:wink1:


----------



## Rotundus (May 7, 2012)

Stuart Davies said:


> desmondus rotundus said:
> 
> 
> > Stu, whats that by the way about 6 or 8 m2 of cells up there?
> ...


no just curious. i currently work for a contractor who is in the loft and cavity insulation game - running on the funding provided by the utility companies.

he is about to go into transition on the domestic pv stuff - which by the sounds of it is not going to be as viable as before.

previously worked for a very short time for a cowboy operation which i was delighted to leave.

that said i have just landed a new field service role in south wales in something totally different (if similar to what i did for years up to recently).

so to be honest my brief return to sales has been an interesting journey; which to be frank am glad is drawing to a close.

might even be able to buy a watch soon rather than continue the current selling phase.

am rambling, you can tell i am alone in the house and have only had 2 pints in 3 weeks


----------



## Stuart Davies (Jan 13, 2008)

Stan said:


> Stuart Davies said:
> 
> 
> > :lol: you lot crack me up and clearly don't know me at all. I NEVER installed these panels as a means to 'make' money - my motives sirs are VERY different. However, I do acknowledge that money is and will be a motive for most so if that is what floats your boat then I will sing from the rooftops (pun) to get the energy revolution started.
> ...


----------



## Stuart Davies (Jan 13, 2008)

Sounds a bit bleak Des. 

The system is 9.8m2. Each panel has a peak capacity of 235 watts. I don't have any other dimensions sorry.


----------



## LJD (Sep 18, 2011)

So many people will go bust ... Thats why i NEVER EVER Jump on the latest trade band wagon, train, kit out, set up and wait for it all to be kicked from under you ! You have to love the UK


----------



## handlehall (Aug 7, 2009)

Stuart Davies said:


> :lol: you lot crack me up and clearly don't know me at all. I NEVER installed these panels as a means to 'make' money - my motives sirs are VERY different. However, I do acknowledge that money is and will be a motive for most so if that is what floats your boat then I will sing from the rooftops (pun) to get the energy revolution started.
> 
> And don't give me that embodied energy [email protected] - your insight is somewhat clouded  How is your carbon footprint on that last bannana you or that bowl of rice you ate or that flight for that holiday - double standards...sigh


Except it isn't crap is it? it's true and the last time I looked banana sellers weren't pretending to save the planet utilising schemes based on unsustainable feed-in tariffs.

As for double standards - not really as I don't do the "carbon footprint" thing at all.

Looked at all the alternatives and basically they don't add up unless you are planning on staying put in the same house for the next 20 years - i'm not.

As for solar panels they are out for me anyway as I live in a listed building.


----------



## Stuart Davies (Jan 13, 2008)

I'm sorry but you are too ignorant to worrant a reply - sorry - just keep burying your head in the sand


----------



## handlehall (Aug 7, 2009)

Stuart Davies said:


> I'm sorry but you are too ignorant to worrant a reply - sorry - just keep burying your head in the sand


Laughable, you can't win an argument so you resort to personal insults and by the way it's warrant not worrant :grin:


----------



## Stuart Davies (Jan 13, 2008)

FiTs cuts to go ahead as planned after House of Commons debate

Opposition proposals to overturn the cut-off date of 12 December for solar PV feed-in-tariffs has been defeated in a House of Commons debate by 72 votes. Earlier this month FoE threatened to sue if the changes went ahead and a recent REA survey claimed 11,000 jobs could be lost and 95 percent of social housing tenants who were expecting panels could miss out.

The defeat by 292 to 220 votes, a majority of 72, means that the previous proposed cut-off date of December 12 will go-ahead as detailed, two weeks before the end of the consultation period set at December 31.

The new Feed-in Tariff (FiT) for Photovoltaic (PV) schemes up to 4kW in size will be 21p/kWh - down from the rate of 43.3p/kWh - to apply to all new solar PV installations with an eligibility date on or after 12 December 2011.

The Solar Power Portal reports on the debate:

Defendants of the proposed cut to the FiT rate argued that the coalition Government inherited a broken system from Labour and the proposed cuts are a result of Labourâ€™s lack of foresight, demonstrated by the omission of an installed capacity cap.

The opposition argued that the implicit costs to the consumer are negligible when compared to the loss of thousands of jobs and millions of finance in income tax. The scale and depth of cuts to the subsidy have meant that the Government has reneged on its promise to be the greenest government ever.

Whilst the result of the debate will be disappointing for the majority of the solar industry, the wider support of the technology, voiced by all parties, will help reassure those concerned about the long-term future of the solar industry in the UK.

A Renewable Energy Association (REA) survey, based on 139 solar companies employing 4,055 people recently claimed that 11,000 jobs face the axe and 33 percent of companies in the industry fear they will have to close as a result of the decision to half the PV feed-in Tariff, as well as depriving 95 percent of social housing tenants who were expecting PV panels.

When the announcement to cut the Tariff rates was made, in November, Friends of the Earth threatened legal action saying that the speed with which the proposed changes will come into effect and the manner in which the reforms appear to proceed the completion of the consultation period is unlawful, and as a result it is planning to seek a judicial review.


----------



## Krispy (Nov 7, 2010)

I, for one, think this is a good move by the govt and I hope their decision stands. Feed in tariffs, be they from wind or solar, are the ultimate rob the poor to give to the rich schemes going in my opinion.

There's also many studies that show that for every 'green job' created by these govt initiatives, around 2 are lost in the real economy, simply because of the increased taxes needed to be raised to pay the green employees.


----------



## Stuart Davies (Jan 13, 2008)

KrispyDK said:


> I, for one, think this is a good move by the govt and I hope their decision stands. Feed in tariffs, be they from wind or solar, are the ultimate rob the poor to give to the rich schemes going in my opinion.
> 
> There's also many studies that show that for every 'green job' created by these govt initiatives, around 2 are lost in the real economy, simply because of the increased taxes needed to be raised to pay the green employees.


That's fine as your opinion but tell me what alternatives are you offering as a means to heat and light your home when the lights go out?


----------



## MarkF (Jul 5, 2003)

Stuart Davies said:


> That's fine as your opinion but tell me what alternatives are you offering as a means to heat and light your home when the lights go out?


I think (but don't know) that KDK is not against solar panels per se, but against people who cannot afford them, *forced* to pay a subsidy, to provide a profit for those that can. TBH I agree with that, this government has only hit the same barrier other governments plus Oz & US states have.


----------



## Stuart Davies (Jan 13, 2008)

MarkF said:


> Stuart Davies said:
> 
> 
> > That's fine as your opinion but tell me what alternatives are you offering as a means to heat and light your home when the lights go out?
> ...


hey Mark - great to see you posting again. Where have you been?

Mark the biggest losers (other than the industry of course) are social housing tenants who reside in many LA and RSL's across the country. Possiblly hundreds of social housing providers have now cancelled their multi-million pounds social housing improvement plans which included PV installations since the announcement to cut FiT was announced. The housing providers were going to keep the FiT and use that money for housing investment the tenant would have kept the free electricity. everyone looses.

Another big looser in this are communities. communities saw this as an opportunity to install PV onto their community buildings thus have a revenue stream which they could reinvest into their dilapidated buildings to make them wind and weather tight, warm and inviting and more energy saving - thus making them more attractive for expansion of use rather than sitting empty and rotting away. Communities are skint and struggling to survive...

FiT is funded through the utilities social obligation. Yes the money is raised via the public BUT apart from FiT billions (yes I used the words billions) is invested in other programmes which are specifically targeted to the fuel poor. The poorest people in our society ( but perhaps I should use the words 'most vunerable') have access to 'social tariffs' - in other words they pay less for electricity & gas than you and I.

I could go on and on. Why? Because it is my job to know this stuff based on facts rather than opinions which have benn read in the press or made by assumption.

FiT is not ill conceived - it just took the powers to be by surprise. It is a victim of its own success because of supply and demand. Yes the FiT rate was set too high initially but hindsight is a wonderful thing. The real 'issue' here is the sneaky way Government has brought in the reduction before the consultation period is over...it was alway assumed by everyone in the know that rates were going to be reduced it the new financial year and everyone was prepared for that but to bring it in 4-months early is down right devious. No one is disputing the fact the the current rates of Fit was unsustainable...

Anyway, please let's not turn this thread into a political ping-pong. I do not wish MY thread to be turned into mud slinging nonsense and be moved to the Politics forum - I would like to be able to report back at the beginning of February with my over all generation figures and tell you how much 'energy' we generated and thus saved. 

Nice to see you back btw


----------



## Stan (Aug 7, 2003)

If someone installs an alternative energy source to provide some (or all) of their energy requirements, I applaud that decision, if based on their own needs, with the break- even cost factored in.

Any surplus produced should be rewarded equivalent to the wholesale price the energy industry currently pays, not at a premium.

Thereâ€™s the rub, what does the energy industry pay, at wholesale price, per kWh?

No offence Stuart old mate, I understand your altruism, but most of us canâ€™t afford the cost the â€œgovernmentâ€ was/is passing on to us for the experiment of making itself appear â€œGreenâ€.

Not your fault, or mine mate.


----------



## Krispy (Nov 7, 2010)

Stuart Davies said:


> That's fine as your opinion but tell me what alternatives are you offering as a means to heat and light your home when the lights go out?


I appreciate it's your thread but as you asked me a question then I'm sure you won't mind me replying?









Your question is interesting but first, tell me, are your solar panels the alternative? You've already stated you expect a shortfall between generation and consumption (after many lifestyle changes) and I would hazard a guess that you are still supplied (and rely on) energy from coal, gas or nuclear powered generators?

As MarkF says, I have no problem at all with you installing solar panels on your roof but should I be paying you through my energy bills to do so? No I shouldn't and the fact that I've had to to make it viable tells me that the technology is not ready (is not sustainable, if you like).

What's more, we would not need 'social tariffs' or the like if we removed these green taxes on the energy we produce in the traditional method to fund solar panels and wind turbines for private individual's gain. I know of not one community that was even considering installing any kind of alternative energy source onto their buildings (based only on friends and family in some of the poorest parts of East London, granted), like you say they are skint and are more worried about eating and keeping the bailiffs away. The only people (person in fact) I know talking about this is a rather well off chap I work with from Winchester whose father runs a 'green homes' construction company.

Your question was 'What are the alternatives?' Well:


Coal. We live on an island of the stuff, hundreds of years worth of it. Dig it up and burn it. Employment and cheap energy. Hallelujah.
Gas. Still quite a lot of that knocking around too. Hundreds of years worth of it. Burn it.
Nuclear (fision and more interestingly, fusion). Clean, stable and dependable.

Can wind or solar power be relied upon like the 3 options above can? I think the simple answer is no or at least not yet - you will require a backup power source for when the wind don't blow (or blows too strongly for the wind turbines) or the sun don't shine. There is no viable or available alternative to the power generation methods that we currently use. It's is pure lunacy to hold an economic pistol to the country's head, in the form of 'green' taxes on fossil fuels, until there is a suitable, working alternative. The weekly and monthly graphs here (http://www.gridwatch.templar.co.uk/) demonstrate the unreliable nature of wind/hydro/pumped energy - could our lives depend on this?

I am a bit confused about your 'when the lights go' out remark, this sounds rather alarmist to me. When are the lights due to out and why? If they are going out any time soon it will not be for a sound scientific or environmental reason, it will be purely political and self inflicted. There is enough fuel on this planet to keep us going for centuries - during those centuries I am sure we will find the solution to cheaper, cleaner, more sustainable energy. It's just that we haven't found it yet.

I'm guessing the whole reason you have installed solar panels, and the reason why it's being discussed here, is because of 'Global Warming'. I am pretty certain (although please forgive me if I'm wrong) that you are going to remark upon the 'carbon footprint' my alternatives would leave. I'd ask you - what of it?

For a long time I believed what the media was telling me about anthropogenic global warming (man made global warming / climate change / whatever it's being called this week) until I began researching it some years ago.

When I began researching it, it didn't take too long to realise that there is in fact very little evidence to suggest that any man-made global warming has ever occurred (the trend is actually cooling now). There is no evidence of a link between airborne carbon dioxide and a rise in temperatures (if there is, please show me it?). Remember, science is based empirical data produced by repeatable observation and experimentation, it's not based on consensus of opinion.

Add to this the utterly corrupt practices of the climate scientists who are at the very heart of the global warming message being fed to the masses and, I'm sorry, but the whole thing stinks. I'm sure you have already but please spend a couple of hours researching all angles of 'ClimateGate' (and now ClimateGate 2.0) and read the email exchanges between Prof Phil Jones, Michael Mann, Keith Briffa, and all those others whose livelihoods depend on 'global warming'. The deleted emails, the deleted data, the computer models that were coded to always come up with the same answer no matter what data you fed to them, the corruption of the peer review process ....it goes on and on. It seems very clear that the evidence was being fixed to fit the policy.

This graph is very interesting, it shows the levels of carbon dioxide in the air over the last 550 million years with the current day being at the left of the scale. You'll see that in the past, this planet had many, many, many times more CO2 in the air and yet at that time, the Earth was covered in ice. How can that be if the science was as simple as CO2 = global warming?










In the last 500 years we have had a little ice age (when the Thames would regularly freeze over) and the Medieval Warm Period when it was warm enough to grow grapes in London (e.g. Vine Street). Climate change is a naturally occurring event, hardly influenced by man at all. It has always happened; it will always happen. We should not be so conceited to think we can stop it but rather learning how to adapt to it.

Again, I appreciate that this is your thread and I do look forward to hearing the results of your installation.


----------



## MarkF (Jul 5, 2003)

Hi Stuart, had a couple of accidents, on the mend now...............

I known that the green tax % of our fuel bills is small but I disgree with it funding profits for other homeowners. It's the tax/grant/subsidy and government (future fuel bill) assumtions that I'll never agree with. The less you are paid the more you pay for energy as a proportion of your income.

If it is a viable business (manipulation free) then I am all for green energy, I used to install units that "resized" induction motors by raising and dropping the voltage to suit the load. I know what a hard game it can be, if businesses couldn't recoup their costs in a couple of years they often didn't want to know. Lot of ostriches out there. Would have been a doddle with grants/subsidies and rebates though....

I'll look forward to reading your figures, I'd like (if poss) to see comparable ones to assess your savings and payback time. What would you receive annually if your surplus was sold at a "real" price (whatever that is)?


----------



## dobra (Aug 20, 2009)

If you are on the threshold, think about the German solar markets growth: the threshold was 1.5 Gigawatts defined by the Renewable Energies Law, and sales topped 2.3 Gigawatts in 2009. The world's largest solar market. Ref: Switching to Solar by Bob Johnstone - what can we learn from Germany's success.

Would it happen here without subsidies? Would it be cheaper to hire a white van, drive there and purchase the kit, probably at a fraction of the price? What about aesthetic appeal of districts littered with disfigured roofs? Lifespan? and many more. Not convinced yet, but by means not "anti".

Mike


----------



## Stuart Davies (Jan 13, 2008)

Thanks for the replies guys - I appreciate the effort put in.

I will get back to you shortly but at the moment I'm up to my eyeballs in work and at home so bare with me...

Stuart

P.S hope you are on the mend Mark and hope it wasn't too serious?


----------



## Stuart Davies (Jan 13, 2008)

12 months have passed and so now I can give you some feedback.

System size 1.41 kWp

Predicted 1060 kWh

Achieved 1180 kWh

So Mark you wanted some figures:

Generated 1180 x 43.3 p/kWh = Â£510.94

Exported (deemed 50%) x 3.1 p/kWh = Â£18.29

Offset (measured from previous years usage) 1030 kWh x 14.23 p/kWh = Â£146.57

Total = Â£675.80

Payback (based on price paid) = 8.58 years

Actual used (so this is my bill for the last 12-months) 1510 kWh x 14.13 p/kWh = Â£213.36

My PV system is very small - economies of scale meant that I paid a high price for a small system. I've seen 3.84 kWp systems for sale at Â£8999 = Â£2349 /kWp - I paid Â£4113 / kWp

^^^^

KrispyDK - I appreciate the effort that you put into your post - I could, if I had the inclination, respond in full with references to peer review journals, swanky graphs and long words but I shan't. I have read enough arguments from both camps to have formed my own view as no doubt you have done too. I'm not going to bring in my day job to my hobby and go off topic on a thread that was about installing a technology.


----------

