Solar PV and Solar Thermal - BIG SCALE, BIG RETURN!

[Morganian]

Hi

My industry is Loft Insualtion, Cavity Wall insulation and Solar energy installations, to domestic premises, commercial premises and LARGE scale Solar projects - not only is this GREEN initiative, it is also a MASSIVELY profitable return on investment for those installing. For instance, I have recently installed 5,400sqm of Solar PV panels into a field as a pilot for myself and a busienss partner (he owned the land). Its WASNT simple - planning, building control etc...but heres the numbers -

£530,000 investment (including all groundworks, installation, materials and hook up to the grid, including £10k for fencing and security provision)

We have negotiated a feed in payment from the utility companies of 0.293 per kWh produced, and a further 0.03 per kWh under the sell back scheme.

We produce 220,000kWh/annum

Year 1 return on investment £71,060

The annual payment is confirmed for 25 years, with a rate of inflation increase on the payments every 2 years. Basically, I am looking at a 11.5% annual return IF INFLATION DOES NOT INCREASE AND FUEL BILLS DO NOT INCREASE!!!! Our business plan looks at an actual return in the region of 18%. Not bad?!?!

So - the point of this post!?!?

1 - raise awareness as to the FINANCIAL return on installing solar energy has NEVER been better. Give me £10k, ill give you 9% return minimum tax free.

2. - anyone ever thought of a large scale project but not had all the info or guts to proceed? Ask! Nows the time to capitalise.

This is going to be a fast moving and potentially big market over the next 5 years - I can see local authorities using their own buildings, flat roof schools etc - landowners using barns etc - landlords using their rented out propoerties as space.....

If you go on one of my websites there is an interesting article about Michael Eavis (Glastonbury Festival) and the project there. Just google Michael Eavis Solar Panels or similar...!

 

Hi

My industry is Loft Insualtion, Cavity Wall insulation and Solar energy installations, to domestic premises, commercial premises and LARGE scale Solar projects - not only is this GREEN initiative, it is also a MASSIVELY profitable return on investment for those installing. For instance, I have recently installed 5,400sqm of Solar PV panels into a field as a pilot for myself and a busienss partner (he owned the land). Its WASNT simple - planning, building control etc...but heres the numbers -

£530,000 investment (including all groundworks, installation, materials and hook up to the grid, including £10k for fencing and security provision)

We have negotiated a feed in payment from the utility companies of 0.293 per kWh produced, and a further 0.03 per kWh under the sell back scheme.

We produce 220,000kWh/annum

How do you know that if you have just installed the system.?

Earl

 

[Morganian]

Which bit would we not know?

For installs on this scale, all the agreements are in place with the utility companies below final phase of install. All power ratings are reported and confirmed by MCS and Ofgem.

Not clear what you mean by your question. If I have not given a full response, please clarify!

 

[cjd]

This would look more credible without all the capitals and exclamation marks and this sort of thing is ripe for the scam.

However, perhaps you could show us your financial model, it's a very interesting new area of business. Tell me, what do you allow for maintenance?

 

[Morganian]

Hi

Apologies for the CAPITALS and exclamation marks!!!! Its just the way I type and emphasise points - didn't

Mainatainence - all products are covered from the manufacturer in the first 2 years, but we have allowed £1,000 per month from year 3 for maintainence. There is also a 100% depreciation against the 25 lifespan.

Thanks for your comments

 

[cjd]

Hi
Mainatainence - all products are covered from the manufacturer in the first 2 years, but we have allowed £1,000 per month from year 3 for maintainence. There is also a 100% depreciation against the 25 lifespan.

I reckon that is unduly optimistic; the technology is very new and rather unreliable. I'd be looking at replacing the lot every 5 years and seeing what that does to the model.

Do you not want to share the model with us?

 

[Morganian]

Happily share the full business plan and all the planning, building control and energy supplier docs - in time I will publish them on my website (not all of them, as part of teh business is project managing this type of install - see Michael Eavis project as referred to in opening post!) - they run to over 350mb of files though so PM me and Ill send you wantever you want.

5 years? New tchnology? No. These Solar fields have been installed in Spain, France and Germany for 12-15 years miniumum. There is one I visited in California and another in South China which have been in place for 18 years already. They are lower powered units than are availalbe in todays market, obviously, but the power depgrade is around 25%.

The new panels themselves have been installed on domestic and commercial installs for the last 25 years plus, and there is a 8-11% degrade on performance over 20 years.

 

[Cornish Steve]

The new panels themselves have been installed on domestic and commercial installs for the last 25 years plus, and there is a 8-11% degrade on performance over 20 years.

So we're talking about technology that's at least 25 years old? Isn't that rather like trying to sell cassette tapes in an age of iPods?

 

[Big Pete]

:| So why are you telling us all this ? :|

 

[Morganian]

:| So why are you telling us all this ? :|

<<Edited by mod to remove personal remarks>>

1 - raise awareness as to the FINANCIAL return on installing solar energy has NEVER been better. Give me £10k, ill give you 9% return minimum tax free.

2. - anyone ever thought of a large scale project but not had all the info or guts to proceed? Ask! Nows the time to capitalise.

 

Tax payer funded scam, solar PV panels are not cost effective in the UK.IMHO

Solar thermal water heating can be reasonably effective.

Earl

 

[cjd]

This is more exaggeration I'm afraid - to claim that the PV technology of 25 years ago is equivalent to that in use today is like comparing a Model T Ford to a Ford Fiesta.

There's something quite interesting though about the combination of increasingly efficient and lower cost PV technology, global warming concerns and pollution plus government subsidy that creates a good business opportunity. But we need less spin and more facts and honesty.

 

But we need less spin and more facts and honesty.

http://lightbucket.wordpress.com/2008/02/24/insolation-and-a-solar-panels-true-power-output/

Earl

 

[Morganian]

Tax payer funded scam, solar PV panels are not cost effective in the UK.IMHO

Solar thermal water heating can be reasonably effective.

Earl

Sorry...not sure where you are coming from on this? What element is the tax payer paying for? If you are referring to the FiT payment, these are paid for by utility companies, not the tax payer - albeit anyone who pays fuel bills would have had their bills inc significantly over the past 5 years, so indirectly everyone contributes.

In terms of kit performance, it is NOT comparing an old car to a new one - the technology hasnt changed, the efficiency of the kit has. The basis of the way in which the technology has developed has not changed. I could bore you for 5 pages but I will not.

In terms of overall performance, there are various sceptics out there, and for every one there is someone else who would argue the other way.

All I can say is this -

1. The 230w power outage panels have been tested over a 3 year period and perform at an annual average rating of 88.4% of optimum performance

2. Over a 3 year period, this performance has not deteriorated.

3. This was tested in Germany, Belguim and in Sweeden and the average performance test was reported - this was an AVERAGE of the 3 performance sites

I will happily share the 281 page performance report and performance specs and full diagnostics report with you if you so desire. just PM me.

 

[cjd]

In terms of kit performance, it is NOT comparing an old car to a new one - the technology hasnt changed, the efficiency of the kit has. The basis of the way in which the technology has developed has not changed. I could bore you for 5 pages but I will not.

Do leave off - the PV technology of 5 years ago is different from today's by a large degree. It's developing very, very quickly.

This is good news not bad so I now need to know why you're telling wee little porky pies?

Please bore me for 5 pages.

 

[Cornish Steve]

raise awareness as to the FINANCIAL return on installing solar energy has NEVER been better. Give me £10k, ill give you 9% return minimum tax free.

Let's look at the financial return.

- You mention a 230W panel. The average household requirement is about 450W, which is two panels. To meet peak daytime demand, however, it's more like five panels.

- How many hours of daylight can we assume? On average, of course, it's 12 hours - so you must store excess capacity or use the regular mains when it's dark. Let's assume you need to produce 40% more power during the day to store and later consume what's needed at night. This increases the required number of panels to seven.

- What's the power output of a solar panel when it's cloudy? Between 10% and 50% of that on a sunny day (so let's make it 30%). On average, one-third of Britain's daylight hours are sunny; the rest are cloudy. This means that solar panel output is 30% for 2/3 of daylight hours and 100% for the other 1/3. On average, then, this means 53% efficiency (let's make it 50% to make the calculation easier). This means we must double the panel requirement from seven to fourteen.

- Each panel costs about £500. That means the cost for 14 panels is £7,000. You are quoting £10,000, so I assume this accounts for installation costs. Let's go with that.

- What is the likely maintenance cost? It's reasonable to assume 5% per year, right? So that's £500 per year.

- What's the average lifetime of a solar panel? Let's assume 20 years (which is what the marketing blurb says for companies selling panels). So, the total price over 20 years is £10,000 + £10,000 = £20,000. In other words, the average outlay per year is about £1,000.

Today, the average family in Britain pays about £500 a year to meet its power needs. The cost of generating this power using solar panels is about twice the cost of using the regular mains supply.

Even accounting for tax advantages, where's the 9 percent return? Where am I going wrong?

 

[Morganian]

Let's look at the financial return.

- You mention a 230W panel. The average household requirement is about 450W, which is two panels. To meet peak daytime demand, however, it's more like five panels.

- How many hours of daylight can we assume? On average, of course, it's 12 hours - so you must store excess capacity or use the regular mains when it's dark. Let's assume you need to produce 40% more power during the day to store and later consume what's needed at night. This increases the required number of panels to seven.

- What's the power output of a solar panel when it's cloudy? Between 10% and 50% of that on a sunny day (so let's make it 30%). On average, one-third of Britain's daylight hours are sunny; the rest are cloudy. This means that solar panel output is 30% for 2/3 of daylight hours and 100% for the other 1/3. On average, then, this means 53% efficiency (let's make it 50% to make the calculation easier). This means we must double the panel requirement from seven to fourteen.

- Each panel costs about £500. That means the cost for 14 panels is £7,000. You are quoting £10,000, so I assume this accounts for installation costs. Let's go with that.

- What is the likely maintenance cost? It's reasonable to assume 5% per year, right? So that's £500 per year. NO - all equiptment is fully guarnanteed for 15 years on a domestic install

- What's the average lifetime of a solar panel? Let's assume 20 years (which is what the marketing blurb says for companies selling panels). So, the total price over 20 years is £10,000 + £10,000 = £20,000. In other words, the average outlay per year is about £1,000. To be fair, most quote 25 years not 20

Today, the average family in Britain pays about £500 a year to meet its power needs. The cost of generating this power using solar panels is about twice the cost of using the regular mains supply. Really? Average cost on electric is £500 per year????? Why is mine £80 pm (2 adults 1 child) why is the average for a 3 bed semi consisiting 2 adults and 2 children quoted at an indexed average of £73.40 pm ???

Even accounting for tax advantages, where's the 9 percent return? Where am I going wrong?

In lots of places, but most blindingly obviously -

You are ignoring the FiT payments (41.3p per kwh) and the supply back payments 3p per kwh.

 

[cjd]

You are ignoring the FiT payments (41.3p per kwh) and the supply back payments 3p per kwh.

You can't use the electricity provided AND feed it back into the network - it's one or the other.

 

Let's look at the financial return.

- You mention a 230W panel. The average household requirement is about 450W, which is two panels. To meet peak daytime demand, however, it's more like five panels.

Try boiling the kettle.

Average output from a 1000watt panel is about 125 watts in the UK.

Earl

 

[Cornish Steve]

Average output from a 1000watt panel is about 125 watts in the UK.

OK, so let's add an efficiency factor to the equation. I'll make it 50% efficient, not the 12.5% you suggested (because you're probably including the weather factor, and I cover that elsewhere). I'll also change the lifetime from 20 years to 25 years and use the average annual electricity bill quoted by the OP (even though this is higher than what I found online). I don't agree with zero maintenance, but let's cut the number from 5% to 4% (not unreasonable, in my opinion, since service contracts are often in the 10% range). Maybe others can add in the 'blindingly obvious' factors mentioned by OP so the model is more accurate. I'd like to see whether there truly is a business case with the technology available.

*************************************************

- Let's assume 230W panels. The average household requirement is about 450W, which is 2 panels. To meet peak daytime demand, however, it's more like 5 panels.

- Let's assume the efficiency of a panel is 50%, so that a 230W panel actually produces 115W of usable power. This means we'll need 10 panels to meet peak demand.

- How many hours of daylight can we assume? On average, of course, it's 12 hours - so you must store excess capacity or use the regular mains when it's dark. Let's assume you need to produce 40% more power during the day to store and later consume what's needed at night. This increases the required number of panels from 10 to 14.

- What's the power output of a solar panel when it's cloudy? Between 10% and 50% of that on a sunny day (so let's make it 30%). On average, one-third of Britain's daylight hours are sunny; the rest are cloudy. This means that solar panel output is 30% for 2/3 of daylight hours and 100% for the other 1/3. On average, then, this means 53% efficiency (let's make it 50% to make the calculation easier). This means we must double the panel requirement from 14 to 28.

- The price per panel is £500. Hence, the price of 28 panels is £14,000. Let's assume an installation fee of £3,000. (This is probably low because it would have to include the cost of a battery to store excess daytime capacity for use at night.) Hence, the total fee for installed panels to meet peak load is £17,000.

- Let's assume 4% per year for annual maintenance costs. That's £680 per year (to make it simpler, let's assume £700).

- What's the average lifetime of a solar panel? Let's assume 25 years. So, the total price over 25 years is £17,000 + £17,500 = £34,500. In other words, the average outlay per year is about £1,380.

Today, the average family in Britain pays about £880 a year to meet its energy needs (that's £73.33 a month, very close to the quoted figure). The cost of generating this power using solar panels is about £1,380.

Currently, I see no positive return on the investment - and the deficit remains at £500 per year. So, what other changes are needed to this model?

 

[davek17]

I have to support Morganian a bit here, why is everyone knocking him so badly?

Firstly bravo for helping save the planet also everyone thought Bill Gates was a nut case when he said he had a vision of putting a PC in everyone's home and desk!! Its hard being a pioneer and by actually going for it like this is great in my eyes.

Solar technology has come on leaps and bounds in the past few years. They do not require sunlight, just light and there are even ones "almost" available that grab energy from the non-visible light spectrum which opens up a whole host of new applications. Imagine getting power from IR at night?!!

You do need to keep the panels clean though and whilst the panels will last 25 years, they often don't or at least lose efficiency towards the end. You also need to protect the panels from accidental and abusiove damage because it will happen. The cables, stands etc also need replacement. Your maintenance plan needs to be rock solid.

Oh and by the way all environmentally friendly power system can power/charge and send back electricity to the network. Its not one or the other and you can mesh together all kinds of solar, wind or whatever to your own system.

Good luck with it.

 

[Big Pete]

<<Edited by mod to remove personal remarks>>

1 - raise awareness as to the FINANCIAL return on installing solar energy has NEVER been better. Give me £10k, ill give you 9% return minimum tax free.

2. - anyone ever thought of a large scale project but not had all the info or guts to proceed? Ask! Nows the time to capitalise.

I will explain something ..

I spend my days in SUNNY Mallorca , now we get 12 hours of blazing sunshine virtually 11 months of the year..

What do i see as i drive around . NOT a single solar panel . a couple of small ones on remote farm roof tops along with small wind turbines.the type B & Q sell..

I was told they dont work , they produce enough to run your lights and thats about it..

Surely if they made sense the place would be filled with them :|

I actually prefer them than them silly ugly stupid windmills , so its a shame really.

 

[Cornish Steve]

why is everyone knocking him so badly?

He claims there's a business case, so I'd like to see it.

Solar technology has come on leaps and bounds in the past few years.

Sorry, but this is hand-waving. I have friends who work for startups in this industry, and they wave their hands a lot too (in between using those hands to take government grants and subsidies). To build a business case, though, you need to provide real numbers.

 

[Cornish Steve]

I actually prefer them than them silly ugly stupid windmills , so its a shame really.

Personally, I prefer this technology even more.

 

[Morganian]

You can't use the electricity provided AND feed it back into the network - it's one or the other.

I'm sorry?????? Do you actually know what you are talking about??? From this post it's quite evident you do not. I suggest you do a little research before you make such assumptions.

 

[cjd]

I'm sorry?????? Do you actually know what you are talking about??? From this post it's quite evident you do not. I suggest you do a little research before you make such assumptions.

I do not know what I'm talking about, that's why I have asked to be bored by your 5 page explanation.

However, you seem to be suggesting (in Steve's analysis) that the energy generated by your PV panels can be both used to run your home and fed back into the grid to receive a payment. I'm saying that that sounds like double counting - the energy is either used or sold; not both. (Except for excess generation of course).

But all of this could be resolved if you showed us your numbers.

 

[Cornish Steve]

(Except for excess generation of course)

I assumed that peak capacity per family is 150% higher than average power need: 1125W instead of 450W. On average, this is 675W of excess capacity. Per day, this is about 16kWhrs. At 41.3p per kWhr, this is about £6.50. Over a year, this is about £2,400 (seems very high).

Let's double-check this by assuming the family gets the same rate for selling power as it does for consuming power. Since the average annual electricity bill is assumed to be £880, this means the family would get £1,320 for the excess power it puts back into the grid. (Does the government really pay twice as much to put power into the network as it gets from selling that power?!)

Still, let's go with the lower number. It means that the family will save/make £820/year from using solar panels.

The business case appears to be there if the government is willing to pay such a high rate when purchasing excess power.

So, now let's see the OP's numbers so we understand the £10,000 figure and a 9% return.

 

[Morganian]

I will more than happily post when I get time.

For ease and convenience if you visit one of my websites by typing solar and guide into a search engine and go to the PV section there is an illustration of the returns through simple formulas.

I will charge 10k for a 2760w rated kit installed. The performance would be 2250. If not I'll give you your money back. (based on South facing)

There's a fit payment calculator on there. Type in 2.25 and £9,999 and it shows you the ££ on a domestic install.

If anyone wants to try me, do it.

For those you don't understand the solar industry, fit payments, performance ratings, current invertr efficiencies and usage payments please research before googling solar and copy and pasting an antiquated blog entry or an article criticizing a poor install or wrong kit in wrong place.


I am a little exasperated by what was a thread to inform people about an exciting green project that's profitable (I have the contracts signed and sealed) suddenly brings ill informed opinions presented as facts.

My old business professor once told me -

"start a business in India, all your friends and family will give up their time to help you. Start a business in america, all your friends and family will give u money to help you. Start a business in Britain and all your friends and family will pick holes in everything tell you your an idiot and then 2 years later scratch your Ferrari"

LOL. I see what he means more than ever. Although, to be honest I only have an Aston.

I'll post the performance output reports, sanitized contract and sanitized energy performave statements later when I get time. Then I don't think I'll bother with uk bus f again. Everyone seems to have missed the point. I've followed the path I needed to to do this project. It's been a 2 year risky project. I've got the balls to take the risk and
put up the capital.

 

[Gord]

However, you seem to be suggesting (in Steve's analysis) that the energy generated by your PV panels can be both used to run your home and fed back into the grid to receive a payment.

You get paid 41.3p even if you use the energy yourself, and an additional 3p if you send it back to the grid.
So it can be 'double counted'.

 

[cjd]

Then I don't think I'll bother with uk bus f again.

That would be a shame - I think the business you are in is very interesting but I also think it requires scrupulous honesty to succeed long term.

Think of it this way, if you can convince us business skeptics, you will be able to convince anyone. Treat this a a test, prove to us that what you have makes financial sense and you'll have a lot of interested buyers.

I am skeptical but open minded, show us your numbers and accept the push back. If you have a bomb proof product it will become obvious, if you don't then you know what to fix. If you just disappear, we'll form our own conclusions.

 

[Cornish Steve]

You get paid 41.3p even if you use the energy yourself, and an additional 3p if you send it back to the grid.
So it can be 'double counted'.

If I understand you correctly, this is obvious. If you generate power and then consume it, of course you shouldn't pay the utility for that power. The two key questions in all of this are:

• How much does the government pay you for putting power into the grid? The answer is 41.3p per kWhr, right?
• How much does the utility charge you for taking power from the grid? It has to be more than 41.3p, right? Otherwise the country would soon be bankrupt.

 

[Morganian]

Steve

If you pay 41.3p per kwh then you obviously have no handle on your outgoings.

Once again, the government do not pay you to do this.

I am going to post a breakdown of our financials as I cannot paste attachments on here, its going to be a summary. Take it as you find it. Ive started a blog to illustrate our project from start to finish and will scan and embed statements and paste onto this. Once up together ill post the link here.

Google MICHAEL EAVIS SOLAR PROJECT to visit one of my sites and see the performance vs. breakdown on another project of ours

 

[Cornish Steve]

If you pay 41.3p per kwh then you obviously have no handle on your outgoings.

Then you have to help me here. Let's say that I generate power from a solar panel and earn 41.3p per kWhr (paid for, it seems, by the government). Now let's say that the utility sells my power to someone else for less than 41.3p - 40.3p, for sake of argument. Ignoring bureaucratic costs for now, that means that someone somewhere (the government?) is losing 1p on every kWhr consumed in Britain! Given Britain's total energy needs in 2008, that would be a loss of almost £3 billion! How is that sustainable?

PS - I just looked it up, and utilities in Britain charge about 11p per kWhr. That means that, if everyone generated their own power and sold it to the government, the official government subsidy would be - wait for it - close to £100 billion. Are they crazy? Who sells something for a quarter of its cost?

 

[Morganian]

Ok,

Here is the breakdown for you. take is as you find it. I cannot paste the detailed equations for angle of panel vs. reflection vs. refraction of solar positioning for performance optimisation or the VERY detailed testing that was undertaken on everthing down to the cabling in the phased inverters and screws and washers that were used in the conversion units.

1. Each panel we have used is rated at an optimised 230w

2. Each panel is 165cm by 99cm, covering a surface area of 1.63sqm

3. The angle/elevation position of the panels and spacing for optimisation required 1.945 sqm of space (plus 20% approx)

4. The 5,400 consists of a 2700 panels, in rings of 30 on base frames of 9 sets of 30 on independent phasing (we actually have 2830 as 130 are spare for ease of replacing any which appear faults in first 2 years)

5. The groundworks, panels, install, utility hook up associated works cost us £531,000

6. Planning etc cost a further £18,000

7. Fencing cost £10,000 (near as damn it) this includes remote CCTV monitoring etc. And a kick-ass electric fence!!! (joke)

8. The RATED power output of max performance of 230w per unit x 2,700 power plates equates to an optimum performance of 621,000 kwh at absolutely maximum power consistently continually.

9. There is a deterioration of approx 18% against performance from the distance circuits, the inverters, cabling etc

10. Our modelling is based on 43% performance of the remaning 509,200kwh (there is a calculation as long as the queue of people who are ill informed and adding to this thread which I wont bore you with)

11. This creates an overall rated performance output of just shy of 220,000 kwH

12. We CANNOT claim 41.3p against this. Large scale projects are by negotiation. We have worked with 5 seperate utility brokers and agents to get the deal to where it was signed. This is at 29.3p per kwh. In addition 3p per kwh through another usage scheme we have negotiated - similar to the FiT and usage payments for domestics premises.


13. 220,000 kwh x 29.3p = 64460
220,000 kwh x 3p = 6,600
Total return 71,060

14. Other considerating factors - the 43% against potential is LOW - it takes into account detoriation over the first 15 years of the kit - the actual performance is currently close to 60% (but it is summer!)

15. The return is therefore the MINIMUM we are anticipating for the first 15 years. There is an element of risk as we do not know exactly what will happen then, but as a safe guard we will get a minimum of 10p per kwh the kit is producing at this stage - by which time we would have more than we were requiring off of the investment.

16. Bear in mined the 29.3p increases by the rate of inflation every 2 years, capped at 37.2p max in first 5 years.

17. Other costs not listed include field visits to similar projects (5k) consulatancy (3k) bribing the local planning officer (sorry - hospitality) (£1k) etc...

Got too much work to do to continue....could go on for another 100 points.

 

[LicensedToTrade]

Sorry guys but having read through the thread from the start, around 3/4 of what Morganian has said is actually entirely true.

I'd be surprised if there were anyone on here who knows more about Solar Panels (PV & Thermal) and the FiT than me (and I'm not blowing my own trumpet).

Morganian has been a little over optimistic with some of his projections but without knowing his exact location in the UK I couldn't give you exact calculations.

For the time being Solar Thermal is a dead duck, it has some environmental credentials (if you overlook manufacture and transportation!) but in terms of economical gain for a domestic householder, Photovoltaic is the only real choice for the next few years.

Granted, there are some short comings with PV, you need to be in an area of high solar emissivity (google 'solar map uk' to see what I mean). There are vast areas of the UK that won't get anywhere near the maximum perceived ROI as they just don't receive enough solar radiation throughout the year.

But some southern regions of England/Wales can benefit from PV.

 

[Morganian]

Then you have to help me here. Let's say that I generate power from a solar panel and earn 41.3p per kWhr (paid for, it seems, by the government). Now let's say that the utility sells my power to someone else for less than 41.3p - 40.3p, for sake of argument. Ignoring bureaucratic costs for now, that means that someone somewhere (the government?) is losing 1p on every kWhr consumed in Britain! Given Britain's total energy needs in 2008, that would be a loss of almost £3 billion! How is that sustainable?

PS - I just looked it up, and utilities in Britain charge about 11p per kWhr. That means that, if everyone generated their own power and sold it to the government, the official government subsidy would be - wait for it - close to £100 billion. Are they crazy? Who sells something for a quarter of its cost?

Steve

CRAZY? possibly! Government paying for it - once and for all NO!

The government DO NOT pay for it.

Yes, 11 - 13p is average

Yes - the financial incentive to produce is MASSIVE - this is one of the reasons why we are turning over nearly £1m per month on PV panels alone

Why would someone give you 40p for something everyone knows is worth 10p?
- they arent giving you it, they are legally binding someone else to give it to you
- they have extremely stringent CERT projections to acheive by 2013, 2015, 2020 and 2050 - without initiatives such as this and loft/cav insulation they would not exceed.
- green lobby groups carry a significant sway
- have you noticed your fuel bills increase by 126% over the last 4 years??? well...now you know where its going....

 

[Morganian]

Sorry guys but having read through the thread from the start, around 3/4 of what Morganian has said is actually entirely true.

I'd be surprised if there were anyone on here who knows more about Solar Panels (PV & Thermal) and the FiT than me (and I'm not blowing my own trumpet).

Morganian has been a little over optimistic with some of his projections but without knowing his exact location in the UK I couldn't give you exact calculations.

For the time being Solar Thermal is a dead duck, it has some environmental credentials (if you overlook manufacture and transportation!) but in terms of economical gain for a domestic householder, Photovoltaic is the only real choice for the next few years.

Granted, there are some short comings with PV, you need to be in an area of high solar emissivity (google 'solar map uk' to see what I mean). There are vast areas of the UK that won't get anywhere near the maximum perceived ROI as they just don't receive enough solar radiation throughout the year.

But some southern regions of England/Wales can benefit from PV.

LICENSED - thankyou. At last, someone with an understanding post a relatively straightforward post! Agree re thermal - theres a market there and a broad appeal for it - we sell 1 in 6 of our solar jobs as thermal.

I am fortunate enough to be in a high output area, and the positioning of the project is ideal.

Thanks for the post. Our calcs are own my post 10 mins ago. I would appreciate your views, as an "expert".

Ta.

 

[Morganian]

That should say - agree re Thermal -ALTHOUGH there is broad appeal and a market there . I think because of 2 reasons - cheaper to invest and a tangible performance - i.e. water goes in, sun warms water, warm water comes out....

 

[LicensedToTrade]

That should say - agree re Thermal -ALTHOUGH there is broad appeal and a market there . I think because of 2 reasons - cheaper to invest and a tangible performance - i.e. water goes in, sun warms water, warm water comes out....

Agreed, the costs of thermal are drastically cheaper...but although they will save a proportion of your heating bills they don't actually bring money in. Plus the install CAN be more intrusive depending on what your existing heating system looks like.

 

[cjd]

As an aside, whoever first designs a solar panel to fit a roof (ie triangular or rhomboid) instead of rectangular, will make a killing.

As a second aside, unless you assume that no-one knows anything about PV cells, you will be forever frustrated. It is highly unlikely that you will be selling only to those who have a full understanding of the technology and financial model. Take this from someone who sells VoIP.

You need to be able to explain your business with infinite patience and forever.

This is helped somewhat by being able to provide links to pre-prepared text. You have spent a lot of time, money and risk to get to where you are; don't expect your potential customers to do the same.