We have just had solar panels fitted!!!

[2stressed]

Amazing!!! Can't believe the reduction in fuel bills. I'm seriously dumbfounded why everyone isn't doing it. We paid fir ours are selves so get the benefit of the feed in tariff but even if we'd got some of the rent a roof schemes the saving in fuel bills would be incentive enough!!!

Happy happy happy!!!

[glaurung]

I agree with piglet, but given these are being subsidised by everyone whether we like it or not, it's better that the panels go up on optimally pitched south facing unshaded roofs, than all the non optimal installations that I see going up around here. Arguably, if you have a perfect roof, it's better you have an installation than someone else less well positioned (this is assuming that the government will only pay FITs for a fixed number of installations, which I think is more or less how it works). If your conscience still pricks you can always gift the proceeds to a worthy cause.

[PigletJohn]

If I can buy energy at 3.75p per kWh, (which I can, from my gas supplier) why would I want to contribute to paying someone 42p or 21p per kWh?

I don't believe it is right to force the majority to subsidise a few lucky panel-owners so they can make a handsome profit out of something that is not economically viable. Do you?

btw my contribution to the subsidy is not shown on my bill.

[AnnawakeFourkiller]

I do understand the ethical point you are trying to make: 3 points to add though

• the handsome profit is only made if you manage to stay in your home for over 10 years; something that increasingly few people are doing as job mobility increases. If it wasn't for FIT's we woudln't have made the investment, as I have no idea even where we are going to be in 5 years time (and with crashing house prices it's douibtful you make the investment back there)
  

• in the pay back you also need to take into account that most people don't have th £7-10 k just sitting around to invest; we pay for it through the mortgage, substantially reducing that handsome profit
  

• The key point though is that you are of course already subsidising pretty much any other form of energy - just not through your energy bil but through your taxes. Could be anything from clearing up nuclear sites through to NHS treating the specific diseases linked to coal mining (apparently we are giving coal miners them free coal though). And if you accept that increased extreme weather events are linked to carbon emissions than you could include the cost of flood defense schemes in that list as well; Or the murky world of export credit guarantees through which we subsidise large companies in quite substantial amounts
  

Much fairer and transparent the way the FITs are run: except since now of course you think you see it on your bill, you have a reason to protest.

[PigletJohn]

I quite fancy having solar generation too, but I wouldn't expect other people to pay me so I could make a handsome profit out of them. I especially wouldn't want them to be forced to subsidise me.

[PigletJohn]

The main factor pushing up energy prices in the UK is our reliance on imported gas.

I don't understand your point. If energy from gas is cheaper than paying big profits to people with panels on their roofs why are you pretending that it's the gas that's expensive?

If you happen to like renewable power that's one thing, but paying extra for it, to little schemes that are not economically viable without a huge subsidy, is quite another.

[GeorgeEliot]

generating more renewable power from resources in the UK will help reduce everyone's bills in the longer term PigletJohn.

We need subsidies to encourage people to invest in new technologies which will have longer-term benefits for all.

[GeorgeEliot]

In Germany, where they have had a FIT system for longer, solar PV is almost at grid parity.

The UK gets the same amount of sunshine as Germany.

The main factor pushing up energy prices in the UK is our reliance on imported gas. We need to be generating more renewable power here in the UK to reduce our dependence on foreign fossil fuels.

[PigletJohn]

GeorgeElliot I am quite happy to pay

that's nice

how about the people who are not happy to pay, and live in e.g. flats or rented homes with no chance of ever getting the benefit of making a handsome profit, but are required to contribute to the profits made by others who are luckier?

[GeorgeEliot]

Interesting debate.

I have a couple of points to add - the current cost of the FIT on consumers bills is £2 per household per year. I am quite happy to pay that even though I cannot afford solar panels at the moment, myself.

The point of a subsidy is to support an emerging technology until it becomes economically viable - solar panels are a perfect example of this, thanks to the subsidies demand has increased and costs have fallen, hence the FITs have been reduced.

Finally, the benefits of solar panels aren't limited to the middle-class homeowners who can afford them. The FIT has made the technology viable for social housing installations too - the housing associations then use the FIT payments to invest in better energy efficiency measures for their tenants, helping to reduce everyone's bills and tackle fuel poverty.

[PigletJohn]

I'm in favour of investment, I'm not in favour of subsidy.

FITs are a subsidy, and, worse, they take money from people who aren't in a position to have panels, and give it to people who are, so that the panel-owners make a handsome profit from an activity that is not financially viable without the subsidy. I say that is unethical.

I have not blamed the energy companies for carrying out the law to put a levy on consumers' bills.

I just had a look at my gas and electricity bills and I don't see the levy itemised on them, so not exactly "open."

Good night.

[inmysparetime]

We are clearly never going to see eye to eye, and this is just going round in circles now, so I will be the better person and leave it to you to have the last word.
Energy companies are clearly very selfish in obeying government guidance to pass on the costs associated with renewable energy to innocent consumers.
Just be glad they are honest and open about the costs involved in that aspect of your bill, and that they are committing to source energy from renewables.
I must say, this has been a most enjoyable debate. Thank you.
Enjoy your evening, and I will enjoy mine.

[PigletJohn]

I still haven't been able to get you to clearly say if investment by energy companies, into research or building renewables, comes out of their profits, or out of a levy on energy bills.

Do you actually know? You said earlier it came out of profits, then you said it came out of revenue. Which do you think it is?

Also, you keep using the word "investing" in relation to FITs. FITs are not an investment, they are a subsidy. I am under no obligation to have an opinion on "Investment" which is the same as my opinion on "Subsidy"

[inmysparetime]

The cost of the FITs is treated the same as the cost of investing in other renewables, yet you seem to have a problem with FITs and not with other renewables.
Why is this? I would have thought you would object to both or neither.

[PigletJohn]

"we include the cost of meeting this obligation in your electricity price."

Fair enough. So you do agree that the money for the FITs subsidy does come from a levy on all the consumers' energy bills.

I'm glad that's settled.

[inmysparetime]

From my energy supplier's website:
"Under the Renewables Obligation all major energy suppliers in Great Britain are required to obtain a certain percentage of the electricity that they sell to customers from renewable sources. Like other energy companies, we include the cost of meeting this obligation in your electricity price."

This covers FITs and all other renewable technology.

[PigletJohn]

have you got that in writing?

Are you denying that the money comes from a levy on consumers' energy bills?

[inmysparetime]

Odd that you know better than the energy company I visited, who personally informed me that it is the company's responsibility to pay FITs, and they try to absorb as much of the cost as possible to avoid passing it on to customers.

[PigletJohn]

it is not customers that are responsible for paying FITs, it is energy companies

You are mistaken. The money comes from a levy on consumers' energy bills.





Customers benefit from the payments energy companies make to FIT recipients, as they get to use the electricity these households feed into the grid.

You are mistaken. The energy bought by FITs is priced far far more than energy bought from the usual trade sources, so the cost is higher.

[inmysparetime]

Firstly, investment in wind farms benefits only the owners of the wind farms, secondly, it is not customers that are responsible for paying FITs, it is energy companies.
Thirdly, customers benefit from the payments energy companies make to FIT recipients, as they get to use the electricity these households feed into the grid.

[PigletJohn]

no, it is a subsidy which is paid to enable a small proportion of people who are in a position to install panels, to make a profit out of a scheme which is not economically viable, at the expense of all the other energy consumers who are complelled to contribute to a subsidy from which they receive no benefit.