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!!!

[ragged]

Something not in my last link, But Martin Lewis (MSE) was talking about it today, too; the amount off your bill is likely to be under 150quid/year. For that you get the pleasure of disposing of the roof rubbish in 25 years.

[Yorky]

BlueChampagne - I thought you couldn't have solar panels with a converted loft. not sure how much of the roof space is needed though - please can a lucky solar person tell me why? or if I've got hold of the wrong end of the wrong stick entirely

[Tianc]

Energy prices went up 18% this year alone.

The UK is about to have a drop in generation capacity as various power stations reach the end of their lives and we can't decide with what to replace them.

Meanwhile power consumption is still rising through gadgetry and increased standard of living (for which read house temperatures and transport). The latter may drop with the recession ? see threads elsewhere on MN ? but basically the cost of power will continue to rise, perhaps increasingly steeply.

So any calculations of money saved or payback time using current figures need to be taken with a very large pinch of salt. The panels are likely to get much more valuable as time goes on. What's more, 25 years isn't a final end date ? efficiency very slowly decreases, but actually panels from 30 years ago are still chugging along.

Obviously you need to be careful of the small print in your individual contract if you're renting-a-roof out, but the principal of micro-generation appears sound when it's done right.

[strandednomore]

I am interested in this but we have strict covenants on our house eg we weren't meant to put a satelite dish on the roof. Plenty of people have anyway and nothing has happened but I think it would be harder to get away with whacking solar panels! However, surely a covenant like this should be overidden by the need for green energy???? I just don't know where to start with this!

[inmysparetime]

Yorky, the sharp solar panels are about 3 ft wide and 6 ft tall, although they can go portrait or landscape IYSWIM.
It's not just square footage of your roof, it's the slope and shape too. We have 8 panels, 6 on the original roof, 2 on the extension, and that is a 2kW system, max allowed for microgeneration is 4kW

[BlueChampagne]

Apparently solar panels will operate at about 80% efficiency AFTER 25 years.

[ragged]

That sounds rather optimistic.
We were quoted something like a manufacturer's guarantee kicking in (Sanyo panels) if the efficiency went below 80% after the first 5 years.
Last year (when we first investigated solar) we were told something like 35% performance after 25 years.
probably varies a lot by manufacturer.
to be honest, in my costings I am assuming 0% performance at 30 years. And 200 quid/year maintenance costs (budgeting for the inverter to go, really).

[notcitrus]

We looked into it, having a London south-facing roof, but the parts left after loft conversion are either too steep or too flat for anyone to fit for free, and almost no companies will consider it even if we paid - which we couldn't afford anyway atm.
Ragged's DH sums up much of my feeling on the free-fit option.

We've just got an efficient boiler and loads of insulation, so probably best to do up the rest of the house and then look at the economics again - I was wondering if installing ground source heat pumps might work when we have to knock the kitchen down and rebuild it?

[CAZ46]

Anyone dealt with HomeSun, the one advertised on the telly?

[GeorgeEliot]

Anyone thinking of doing this should get in quick, because the payments are about to be slated by the government.

www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2011/oct/25/consumers-solar-panels-subsidies

[GeorgeEliot]

slashed not slated

[ragged]

I don't think FIT will go down until scheduled to reduce in March 2012; however, there is an anticipated big hike in the price of solar panels in next year or so, according to something DH sent me today.

[GeorgeEliot]

The trend in prices for solar panels has been falling - the worse case scenario is that the government will bring forward the deadline for registering for FIT, which will cause absolute chaos. We should hear soon.

[AlaskaHQ]

If you are interested in this, then be aware that a new Government announcement & Consultation came out at the start of this week, saying that for all installations after December 11th, you will get a lower reduced rate from next April, rather than the current 43p rate.

If you want to do solar panels, and get the current 43p rate (which is really good value) for the full 25 years, you need to have them installed and registered in advance of the 11th December date - less than 6 weeks time.

[BTBsmum]

You need to move fast if you want the free solar products as you must be installed and registered by 12 December before these products disappear. I know of many very happy free solar customers. Good luck!

[mumteacher]

Is anyone still thinging of doing this at the 21p? Were looking at it the numbers seem to still make sense getting a 9% return. The cost of the installing seems to have come down so still looks good. Any thoughts?

[inmysparetime]

My PILs got theirs fitted on the understanding they'd only get the 21p (they might well get more though)

[PigletJohn]

I wonder if this belonmgs in "Ethical living" when the subsidy is paid for by an extra amount paid by all the other consumers who haven't got/can't afford solar panels?

[inmysparetime]

Who should pay it then?

[PigletJohn]

that's an interesting half-question, inmysparetime

Is your starting point that people who are lucky enough to own a house, preferably large enough to have a large roof, should receive a subsidy paid for by somebody else?

[inmysparetime]

The cost is met by the energy companies (who pass it on through bills as they are businesses). If it was met by government we would all be paying it anyway through tax. The FIT makes home energy generation a viable economic choice.
Your ethical argument could exclude most ethical products. For example, reusable nappies exclude people who don't have the resources to store, clean and dry them, moon cups exclude men (and non-menstruating women).
All ethical choices are available to only those who have the resources to access them.

[PigletJohn]

there is a difference between availability of mooncups that men don't use, and a subsidy that is paid to a few, by many.

Especially when all the other users are compelled to contribute to the subsidy, even when they receive no benefit from it and are not in a position to qualify.

It might be a "viable economic choice" for me to drive around in a Bentley if I could get you and some other people to subsidise me through a "50p a mile Driving Tariff Payment to Bentley owners." But would it be an ethical choice?

[inmysparetime]

The government has an international renewable energy target to meet, and decided this was the best way to meet it. Rather than attacking people who benefit from the subsidy, perhaps your energies would be better spent lobbying government to find a fairer way to meet their green energy obligations.
Your energy costs also include an amount to subsidise lower income families' social tariffs and free insulation. Should they stop that too? Those measures only help certain people.

[PigletJohn]

That's lovely, inmysparetime

What made you decide that I was attacking people who are benefitting from the subsidy?

What makes you think you know who I am, and am not, lobbying?

I see you are avoiding my question of whether it is ethical for people who don't own houses, or can't afford Solar Panels, to be forced to subsidise the lucky ones.