Why don’t we put solar panels on every home?

[Whyaretheynotdoinganything]

Just as the tile says, I’m wondering why the government or the opposition are not proposing free solar panels for every home as a solution to the energy crisis and energy security?

Surely a cost benefit analysis would show net economic benefit, whereas subsidising household energy bills is expensive with little return for the economy.

One barrier would be the workforce, but we’ve managed mass construction projects in the past eg. post war council house building programme.

We need a radical solution fast, it would at least give us hope even if the returns are not immediate.

Those who don’t want panels can pay market rates. Apparently panels pay for themselves in 7 years. I’d happily contribute a proportion but don’t have the savings to cover it all.

I agree with you, entirely, OP. It's not only the major issue of households affording heat, it is also global issues, such as environment, and critically, avoiding world wars, which are often waged over oil and other resources.

It's sad, but quite likely, that Britain is no longer capable to roll out big projects with massive infrastructure changes, as the Victorians did, with the rail networks and great bridges.

I agree with you, that the science must be there to overcome existing obstacles, it's the investment which is either lacking, or thinking cynically, that the powers that be have created an existing economic model which won't allow for projects, such as altering the national grid to take privately-supplied power etc.

It's awful, and makes me wonder what is going on. Private people not being able to store any excess harvested power would be regrettable, but, then again, the sun is shining everyday day, and we are not fully utilising its energy, so not being able to use the excess, is not a good reason.

We need to have solar panels, now!

I have a south facing roof and would love to get them but if I sell before breaking even I would be at a loss.

Being shared ownership, I bear 100% cost of any improvements but when I sell, the housing association take half of the added value.

Are they still buying back extra electricity? I thought someone said they had stopped doing that in 2019?

Also standing charges are so high and I guess they wouldn't change?

We have them and have hardly drawn any electricity since May. But we have a lot, south facing big roof, and in the south of England. And we have a battery.

Around here new builds have one or two solar panels on. Which feels like a waste of south facing rooves - I’m not sure how easy it would be to put more one around here. It feels like a token investment that may make it harder to put more on the rooves in the future.

There aren't enough accredited installers to fill the demand in the current market and the number of general electricians in the country already falls well short of the industry needs.

Some houses may not be able to support this, either for their roof or their orientation, but this is something I am wondering too.
It would be future proof, clean.

@undermilkjug

That's interesting, will have another look at it, thank you.

We have ancient tiles on our roof, and the roof is mentioned in the listing as well as the titles being very fragile, so I think it's just out of the question. However there is a Victorian slate roof outbuilding that's south facing, and there potentially we could try again.

We’re also not allowed because se live in a listed building, and our south-facing roof is the one that is most prominent from the street. Solar slates wouldn’t be an option for us because the current slate roof tiles (made of special local slate) are one of the key features of the listing. We’ve tried and been turned down three times.

Couldn't public buildings and civic offices be fitted with them, to store energy to benefit everybody?

This is probably a stupid question but if you plan to one day do a loft conversion can you still get solar panels or would you have to wait until the conversion is done first or would it not be possible to have both? What if you get them done and then needed a new roof further down the line would they remove the panels and then put them back on the new roof or is that not possible either?

Our house is 7 years old but we only moved in a couple of months ago so I'm thinking long term. I have seen a few houses and garages on the development with solar panels but not many considering it's a huge development.

Insulating homes would be cheaper

My brother is doing his PhD on solar storage solutions and in reality we are a long long way away from doing this efficiently.

Governments really need to quit wasting time and enteegua strong arming developing nations to cut emissions (a fraction of developed countries own historic emissions) and pump more and finding into R&D to develop efficient, viable renewable solutions.

I qualified for a grant last year for free solar panels. I can't have them because the roof of my 200yr old cottage isn't strong enough apparently.

Just looked at MoneySavingExpert, they are saying 18 years to break even based on current price cap, 15 years if it rises 25%, 23 years if it rises 50%

My family member did it right, they got the panels installed on, I believe, a grant in 2018, and are on a feed in tariff.

Surely if your roof faces north the other side of it faces south? You only need to put them on one side. I imagine the worst roofs are actually those which face east/ west.

If we’re talking about the government subsidising them I think the money would probably be better sent installing free insulation in all houses first.

I think the problem with any green energy is that the government has to maintain the tax take so they can't give consumers sufficient freedom. Unfortunately the focus is on this rather than actually encouraging people to be greener.

We looked at solar panels but the return would have taken ages. This was back at the time when you were paid quite well.

Frankly I'm not doing anything which means I have to supply energy to the bloated energy companies for peanuts and then pay ££££ to get any extra I might need back.

I don't understand why there isn't more support to get solar panels and battery storage. Considering the cost of building new nuclear power stations surely it would be cheaper to suppose people to insulate their homes better and add solar/wind and/or battery storage (plus look into communal energy storage such as the Swiss hydro plan linked above.

We are getting solar panels and 11kwh battery storage installed (once our application to connect to the grid is approved as we will have 14 panels). In the summer we should be nearly self sufficient for electricity.

When we get our electric car we will need a bit from the grid, but if we get an electric car tariff with cheaper electricity for a period overnight then we can also top up our house battery then in the winter and massively reduce our energy costs then as well.

Plus that helps smooth demand on the grid so less need to top up gas power stations. If more houses had battery storage (or electric cars with car to house/grid export potential) then energy could be stored when lots is produced for use at times of high demand).

There are also encouraging signs of heat storage too- you can now get thermal batteries that can store electricity and use it to heat water. If this can be further developed it could help reduce the gas used in British homes.

We need more incentives for green innovation.

We’ve got 18 panels on our south facing roof (with no shade) and a battery attached. Had them installed a couple of months ago, current estimates are 4.5 years for them to pay for themselves based on the known cost increases.

I definitely think there should be legislation about all new builds requiring some kind of renewable energy source, or passive design.

Our gas bill usage is low (we have GCH and water but use it very little- just switch on when needed and we prefer the house cool) but our electricity usage is high, because we’re both working from home.

So personal electricity generation is what would help us, not insulation.

Contrary to popular belief solar panels are not sustainable. They are environmentally friendly only during the working part of their life cycle. The manufacturing process is absolutely filthy and the disposal is even worse. Currently used panels sit in dumps as nobody knows how to safely dispose of them. We'll end up with mountains of used, toxic panels.

That was for @midgetastic

I moved into a HA new-build with solar panels and I was fucking delighted.

less so when I quickly learned the HA were selling it directly to the grid and it wasn’t powering the houses. Cheers!

Probably a stupid question, but what happens to power station generated electricity? Is that all used immediately or do we store that?

Second stupid question - if you have solar panels etc at home and get most energy for your home that way, so you still have to pay the crippling standing charge?

The government should have been investing heavily in public transport, public heating, passing legislation on passive house style new builds for decades as all of this technology and know how has been around for decades - google Freiburg sustainability for an example. The reason none of this has been done and investment was pulled for renewable projects is all about politics, money and power. Unfortunately, the oil producers have all the money and all the power. We could all make better voting choices and lobby our local MP's to tell them what we would like to see happen.

If we could buy solar panels, outright own them and use the energy just for our own homes then more would. It’s not that simple, complex agreements/contracts/terms are the issue.