Solar Panels - why bother?

[Jambo85]

Dr Doofenshmirtz said:

I have a DIY install on my garage roof.
3 x 250w panels, Mastervolt Soladin 600 inverter and a homemade input meter (volts+amps).

Awesome. Dare I ask - does it have a means of stopping generating if the grid goes down?

[crashley]

So, we moved into a new-build in June last yr. Pre-requisite for planning (i'm told by the local developer) was a solar install, so we have 6 panels on the roof (max capacity 1.5 i believe), which are hideous, and i would have preferred (and prob will install anyway) a log-burner.

Anyway, i have just received my AUG-DEC FIT statement which shows volume 446.5kWh - and thus i will receive a payment of a rather wondrous £14.85

Now, given i still receive an electricity bill, which is probably c.£600pa - this effectively cuts my elec bill by approx £30pa. Have i missed something here?

If the above is correct, i'm removing them, banking the second hand value and buying a log-burner - because at least they're a nice feature.

[Dr Doofenshmirtz]

Jambo85 said:

Dr Doofenshmirtz said:

I have a DIY install on my garage roof.
3 x 250w panels, Mastervolt Soladin 600 inverter and a homemade input meter (volts+amps).

Awesome. Dare I ask - does it have a means of stopping generating if the grid goes down?

Yes of course - it's a grid-tie MPPT inverter. As soon as the power goes, the inverter switches off.
I know what you're thinking - if the power goes down my little 600 watt inverter will keep powering the whole street and kill any electrical engineers. Well, no. It won't.

[Ken Figenus]

Have had a 3.5kwh system since just before they started degrading the FIT tariff - July 2011. Just put in my FIT reading and Sept 4 to end Feb and its about £470 = 928Kwh generated. Not a lot but then its winter... Its generating 300w now on a glum grey day which powers this PC!

Installed a iBoost diverter and plumbed it to a storage heater (as we have a combi like many for water and no storage tank) - it can fill it with 17kw but ironically mostly only the days you need it the least.

System cost about £12k with decent components (Sanyo panels and SMA inverter) - find it all a bit tenuous really and there is the risk that an inverter failure will cost a grand (10yr warranty...).

I have ZERO issues with the aesthetics though - its just the back roof of a semi; not losing any sleep over the loss of the slates visibility! The new integrated panels that ARE the roof do make far more sense though - just slightly more in cost than a std passive roof tile... See at about 42" in here https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kgi4S89AVgY

[feef]

julian64 said:

kapiteinlangzaam said:

You said my house is worth 20k less with the panels. It's a stupid statement. End of. Backed up by recent valuations and a dose of common sense.

I'm afraid we'll have to differ. I'm never going to convince you that those panels on your house are hideous. A single panel would have been passable, but the way you've stepped them unevenly down the 45 degree angle of the roof is just terrible, especially as they don't match in any way from the panels on the other side.

Possibly its just my OCD and the rest of the world would be fine with them. After all no one else on this thread has commented on them.

Good luck with the house sale.

And when you're lying on your death-bed, you'll be able to smile contentedly at how fulfilled your life was because you didn't have an ugly roof. Whereas the rest of the world who aren't so petty will be enjoying travel, toys and more fulfilling life experiences with the money they've saved

[julian64]

feef said:

And when you're lying on your death-bed, you'll be able to smile contentedly at how fulfilled your life was because you didn't have an ugly roof. Whereas the rest of the world who aren't so petty will be enjoying travel, toys and more fulfilling life experiences with the money they've saved

I would respectfully suggest you aren't very good at maths.

[Murph7355]

feef said:

And when you're lying on your death-bed, you'll be able to smile contentedly at how fulfilled your life was because you didn't have an ugly roof. Whereas the rest of the world who aren't so petty will be enjoying travel, toys and more fulfilling life experiences with the money they've saved

Judging by some of the amounts mentioned above I'm not sure they'll have travelled far

Beauty's in the eye of the beholder. That install's not the worst I've seen. Nor is it the best (it'd be sufficient for me not to do it). We currently have a couple of butt ugly solar thermal panels on the rear of our house that I have no idea how the previous owner got planning for. Can't be sure how much, if anything, they save us - solar thermal is a bad idea for the UK IMO. They can stay for now until they need fixing again....at which point they may well be coming off.

[Jambo85]

I hadn't realised until recently that the maximum FIT is now dependent on a reasonable Energy Performance Certificate score. D something from memory?

[King Herald]

I keep getting 'suggestions' in Bookface telling me that I am so lucky because my local area is now eligible for solar panel installation with NO payment up front.....and that I could save 600 notes a year on my bill......


Oh joy....

I thought the bubble had burst and the whole country realised they are a fad??

[PixelpeepS3]

King Herald said:

I keep getting 'suggestions' in Bookface telling me that I am so lucky because my local area is now eligible for solar panel installation with NO payment up front.....and that I could save 600 notes a year on my bill......


Oh joy....

I thought the bubble had burst and the whole country realised they are a fad??

The irony of that post. it is oil & gas that are the fads !

[King Herald]

PixelpeepS3 said:

The irony of that post. it is oil & gas that are the fads !

Fads? So the whole world operating on oil and gas is just a fashion thing, something that people do to keep up with a trend? Seriously?

I guess when the novelty wears off we will all return to coal to provide our power?

[dickymint]

Jambo85 said:

I hadn't realised until recently that the maximum FIT is now dependent on a reasonable Energy Performance Certificate score. D something from memory?

Yes it's grade D

The average house in England and Wales falls short of grade D !!

So yet another hurdle for the less off to drink the gravy before the train finally de-rails.

This is a tax collected from ALL energy users that only the wealthy (and more often than not, gullible) can get their hands on.

[dickymint]

King Herald said:

PixelpeepS3 said:

The irony of that post. it is oil & gas that are the fads !

Fads? So the whole world operating on oil and gas is just a fashion thing, something that people do to keep up with a trend? Seriously?

I guess when the novelty wears off we will all return to coal to provide our power?

Just like when Stone Age Man invented fire.........."it's just a fad Fred give it a million years It'll pass and we can go back to eating Dinosaur Tartare".

[Super Slo Mo]

bearman68 said:

I have a very small system - about 8kwh worth. It generates about 3.5k a year (FIT now about 52p per unit IIRC), so from an investment perspective it's rather good. I spent about 20k on the system. That's better than most financial investments.

I realise I'm quoting a 2 week old post, but the bit in bold seems to miss the point to me, in common with what seems to be the 'man maths' used by everyone who is trying to justify solar on cost grounds.

Using the example above, the £20k example will take around 13 years to pay back.

Given that, presumably, the solar panels have no real asset value, as far as I can see the 'investor' is now at point Zero, or in other words, the point he was at before investing the £20k in the first place 13 years earlier.

Most financial products have a realisable asset value at the end of the term, they don't just pay interest/dividends/income and end up with a value of zero at the end. So your end value is the initial asset value plus anything you have earned over the term.

However, Solar Panels don't actually make any money until the initial investment is re-paid, so effectively your money has been tied up for the duration but generating no interest whatsoever.

For example, if that £20k was put into an investment that generated an average of 3% per year, assuming annual compounding, it would be worth just over £29,000 at the end of 13 years. The solar panels would take another 6 years (assuming rates as paid above, so about 7.5%) to equal that return.

And that is without taking the time value of money into account too, which basically just adds to the repayment term.

This is not great investing, unless I've missed something.

[crashley]

crashley said:

So, we moved into a new-build in June last yr. Pre-requisite for planning (i'm told by the local developer) was a solar install, so we have 6 panels on the roof (max capacity 1.5 i believe), which are hideous, and i would have preferred (and prob will install anyway) a log-burner.

Anyway, i have just received my AUG-DEC FIT statement which shows volume 446.5kWh - and thus i will receive a payment of a rather wondrous £14.85

Now, given i still receive an electricity bill, which is probably c.£600pa - this effectively cuts my elec bill by approx £30pa. Have i missed something here?

If the above is correct, i'm removing them, banking the second hand value and buying a log-burner - because at least they're a nice feature.

Anyone thoughts on this too, now thread is 'live' again ?

[dickymint]

crashley said:

crashley said:

So, we moved into a new-build in June last yr. Pre-requisite for planning (i'm told by the local developer) was a solar install, so we have 6 panels on the roof (max capacity 1.5 i believe), which are hideous, and i would have preferred (and prob will install anyway) a log-burner.

Anyway, i have just received my AUG-DEC FIT statement which shows volume 446.5kWh - and thus i will receive a payment of a rather wondrous £14.85

Now, given i still receive an electricity bill, which is probably c.£600pa - this effectively cuts my elec bill by approx £30pa. Have i missed something here?

If the above is correct, i'm removing them, banking the second hand value and buying a log-burner - because at least they're a nice feature.

Anyone thoughts on this too, now thread is 'live' again ?

Here's my thoughts......

[dickymint]

kapiteinlangzaam said:

crashley said:

crashley said:

So, we moved into a new-build in June last yr. Pre-requisite for planning (i'm told by the local developer) was a solar install, so we have 6 panels on the roof (max capacity 1.5 i believe), which are hideous, and i would have preferred (and prob will install anyway) a log-burner.

Anyway, i have just received my AUG-DEC FIT statement which shows volume 446.5kWh - and thus i will receive a payment of a rather wondrous £14.85

Now, given i still receive an electricity bill, which is probably c.£600pa - this effectively cuts my elec bill by approx £30pa. Have i missed something here?

If the above is correct, i'm removing them, banking the second hand value and buying a log-burner - because at least they're a nice feature.

Anyone thoughts on this too, now thread is 'live' again ?

Some thoughts.

446.5kwh for the period AUG-DEC is low (I presume youve not many panels, sorry if already mentioned but im not going back through the thread)?

Over the same period I produced 2,131 kWh for example. I directly consumed about 1,000 of those kWh, and fed the remaining 1100ish back in to the network. I also used approx 600 kWh from the network when the panels werent producing (or not producing enough), meaning I had an excess (or 'refund') on approx 500 kWh. On my feed in tariff thats worth approx €100.

So over the mentioned period I was energy neutral (for an approx value of €250-300), plus received approx. €100 in addition. So the panels have 'paid me' approx €350-400 in the AUG-DEC period.

Over a given 12M period, my system produces somewhere between 5-7MWh, which means its paying for itself at an approx rate of €1000-1200 per year, which = a 7-10 year payback time.


Ill qualify the above statement by admitting I am in NL and things may be different in the UK, but surely the 446kWh figure is only the 'excess' that you delivered in to the network when the panels are producing more than you are consuming. You should also have a significantly lower electricity bill that needs to be factored in....?

May be to do with you (NL) being on a "net metering system" ?

[Dr Doofenshmirtz]

crashley said:

So, we moved into a new-build in June last yr. Pre-requisite for planning (i'm told by the local developer) was a solar install, so we have 6 panels on the roof (max capacity 1.5 i believe), which are hideous, and i would have preferred (and prob will install anyway) a log-burner.

Anyway, i have just received my AUG-DEC FIT statement which shows volume 446.5kWh - and thus i will receive a payment of a rather wondrous £14.85

Now, given i still receive an electricity bill, which is probably c.£600pa - this effectively cuts my elec bill by approx £30pa. Have i missed something here?

If the above is correct, i'm removing them, banking the second hand value and buying a log-burner - because at least they're a nice feature.

The panels should help lower your overall electricity bill a bit. Even with only 1500 (max) watts to play with (which is a small system) there are things you can do to harvest that free energy, such as setting the washing machine to come on at 11:00 am. Smaller devices like broadband router, things on standby etc will be powered from the panels most of the day which does add up over time.

[Jambo85]

Super Slo Mo said:

bearman68 said:

I have a very small system - about 8kwh worth. It generates about 3.5k a year (FIT now about 52p per unit IIRC), so from an investment perspective it's rather good. I spent about 20k on the system. That's better than most financial investments.

I realise I'm quoting a 2 week old post, but the bit in bold seems to miss the point to me, in common with what seems to be the 'man maths' used by everyone who is trying to justify solar on cost grounds.

Using the example above, the £20k example will take around 13 years to pay back.

Given that, presumably, the solar panels have no real asset value, as far as I can see the 'investor' is now at point Zero, or in other words, the point he was at before investing the £20k in the first place 13 years earlier.

This is not great investing, unless I've missed something.

You make good points but I think your initial calculations may be wrong - I interpret the 3.5k to be £3.5k and therefore payback time is 20/3.5 = 5.7 yrs.

Assuming useful life of 20 years then 14.3 yrs x 3.5k = £50k of income after payback.

But the original post is vague enough that I could also be interpreting it incorrectly.

[Super Slo Mo]

Ok, I was working on the assumption that 3.5 k was kWh rather than sterling. The numbers look rather better like that, although £3,500 per annum doesn't sound like a small system to me!