The first half megawatt

[Giga2]

No.

Because the newest generation panels will be better and a 10th of the price?

 

[Falcon]

Because the newest generation panels will be better and a 10th of the price?

Joking aside, I'd put a few up if they WERE a tenth of the price and doing
so didn't cost everyone else money in the form of higher electricity
prices. The cost of panels isn't the only factor to be considered when
deciding to install them; like wind turbines, without generous Feed in
tariffs working alongside the Renewables Obligation they would never pay
their way. Currently these measures are adding around 15% to all fuel bills
and that's expected to rise significantly as penetration levels increase.

These are tough times for many people though. The government has said it
will review FITs with a view to delivering £40 million of savings (around
10%) in 2014/15. How they intend to do that is anyone's guess. Reducing the
guaranteed price perhaps? The DECC says "The review will be completed by
the end of 2011, with tariffs remaining unchanged until April 2012" but add
.... "(unless the review reveals a need for greater urgency)."

Considering the fact that renewables subsidies are expected to amount to
around £5 billion in 2020 through the renewables obligation alone and
around £360 million through the climate change levy exemption (both figures
in 2010 prices, quoted by the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State to
the DECC in Lord's Hansard 19 Jan 2011 : Column WA33), I expect the
government's sense of 'urgency' could rise very soon.

http://xrl.us/bjmpa6 (Link to www.decc.gov.uk)

 

[Stephen Wolstenholme]

Good point. What will be the residual value of 25 year old solar panels?
Will an item guaranteed for five years by the manufacturer actually last
that long? I would imagine your guess is as good as mine

Solar panels have a half life of about 30 years but are usually
guaranteed for a bit less than that.

Steve

--
Neural network applications, help and support.

Neural Network Software. www.npsl1.com
EasyNN-plus. Neural Networks plus. www.easynn.com
SwingNN. Forecast with Neural Networks. www.swingnn.com
JustNN. Just Neural Networks. www.justnn.com

 

[Peter Franks]

Because the newest generation panels will be better and a 10th of the price?

Presumably. Also, it will have depreciated and have virtually no resale
value.

 

[Peter Franks]

Joking aside, I'd put a few up if they WERE a tenth of the price and doing
so didn't cost everyone else money in the form of higher electricity
prices.

Cost isn't the issue, cost /effectiveness/ IS.

As soon as they are cost effective, I'll install them.

At current prices, they are NOT cost effective, so why would I install them?

The cost of panels isn't the only factor to be considered when
deciding to install them; like wind turbines, without generous Feed in
tariffs working alongside the Renewables Obligation they would never pay
their way. Currently these measures are adding around 15% to all fuel bills
and that's expected to rise significantly as penetration levels increase.

These are tough times for many people though. The government has said it
will review FITs with a view to delivering £40 million of savings (around
10%) in 2014/15. How they intend to do that is anyone's guess. Reducing the
guaranteed price perhaps? The DECC says "The review will be completed by
the end of 2011, with tariffs remaining unchanged until April 2012" but add
... "(unless the review reveals a need for greater urgency)."

So, how exactly does government 'reduce the price'?

Considering the fact that renewables subsidies are expected to amount to
around £5 billion in 2020 through the renewables obligation alone and
around £360 million through the climate change levy exemption (both figures
in 2010 prices, quoted by the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State to
the DECC in Lord's Hansard 19 Jan 2011 : Column WA33), I expect the
government's sense of 'urgency' could rise very soon.

Subsidies don't reduce price, they just shift costs from one person to
another through compulsion.

 

[Falcon]

news:[email protected]... [..]
Oh yeah, opportunity cost. Always easy to forget. I think 5% is a
reasonable estimate for such figures. So the question is will it
still be worth quite a lot in 15 years?

No.

Because the newest generation panels will be better and a 10th of the
price?

Joking aside, I'd put a few up if they WERE a tenth of the price and
doing so didn't cost everyone else money in the form of higher
electricity prices.

Cost isn't the issue, cost /effectiveness/ IS.

As soon as they are cost effective, I'll install them.

At current prices, they are NOT cost effective, so why would I install
them?

The cost of panels isn't the only factor to be considered when deciding
to install them; like wind turbines, without generous Feed in tariffs
working alongside the Renewables Obligation they would never pay their
way. Currently these measures are adding around 15% to all fuel bills
and that's expected to rise significantly as penetration levels
increase.

These are tough times for many people though. The government has said
it will review FITs with a view to delivering £40 million of savings
(around 10%) in 2014/15. How they intend to do that is anyone's guess.
Reducing the guaranteed price perhaps? The DECC says "The review will
be completed by the end of 2011, with tariffs remaining unchanged until
April 2012" but add ... "(unless the review reveals a need for greater
urgency)."

So, how exactly does government 'reduce the price'?

Feed in tariffs are set by the government.

 

[Tom P]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1


in message news:[email protected]...

You obviously do not understand electrical units!

Now other than your very obvious thread title displaying not knowing the
difference between power and energy... where did you get the ridiculous
idea you would ever "break even" on this investment?

If you put out $11,000 for the materials and installation the lost
investment interest on that, alone would come to ( I am being kind.. I
average more like 9-10%)
$11000 x 5% = $550 per year.

In your "15 year payback time", you bragged, the interest lost would
amount to $8,250 (uncompounded even). In the time you take to
"break-even" you will have repair and probably be replacing some of
these panels with new ones. I doubt your grid-tie will survive the 15
years, especially with that poor quality European energy, it is attached
to.

In short, until systems get a lot cheaper the payback time is "until
death do us part". Then it will cost your estate to have it removed.
BTW: In America you would be removing that system to sell your house
unless you want to deep discount it. Everybody wants one but to start
fresh with their own. This will change.


I have some swamp land to sell you in Florida. Absolutely no crocodiles,
guaranteed.



mike

Investment 11690€ net

Predicted output/yr 2.600 Kw
FIT 0.28€/Kw
Revenue 728+
insurance 88-
maintenance 100-
---
Balance 560€ profit

Writeoff PA 5% 584€
Balance 22€ loss
Taxable profit zero

ROI 4.79% tax free

 

[Vaughn]

After all its pretty much a solid-state component with no moving parts

"Pretty much" yes, but it's the exceptions that kill you. Most inverters
incorporate both fans and electrolytic capacitors. Neither of those items
last forever, either will cause failure.

I can't see any particular reason they wouldn't last for 50 years

50 years is wildly optimistic. There are too many things that can happen to
any installation. Some of them have little or nothing to do with the
robustness of the design. Equipment can get zapped by line surges or
lightning, can get wet, stolen, attacked by bugs or rodents, displaced by
home repairs & renovations; the list goes on...

Vaughn

 

[Desertphile]

It has already been spring for two of those
eight weeks.

In the summer you will produce more power than you
can use, but in January not enough.

I have about 3 m2 on the roof of my trailer. With LED light
fixtures and gas heat and cooking it produces
enough. After a few months of
operation the inverter died. I had to remove it (big job)
to repair it. When I repaired it, I found a design flaw
in the inverter. It needs to draw about 100 amps to power
the microwave, and the wires and connectors in the box
are not big enough. The connectors melt and produce smoke.

Solar panels are not zero maintenance. They gradually become
covered with dust which reduces the efficiency. They need to
be accessible for cleaning, and they need to be cleaned regularly.

Solar power pays in some places but not others. A person needs
to be aware of all the issues add things up carefully. Good
luck with your project.

Where I live 100% of the electricity comes from PV panels. If we
had access to city electricity we would switch over: city
electricity costs much less than electricity from photovoltaic
cells.

 

[Peter Franks]

Investment 11690€ net

Gross?

 

[you]

No salesman talked me into this. It was an experiment. I guess you
think it is stupid to try something and report the results? Smart
people only spend their time cutting others down, eh?

The inverter was rated for it. It was not cheap. The
batteries were special and held up, but they are high maintenance
golf cart batteries.

The biggest problem was finding a low power microwave. Time after
time I found the power consumption numbers stated in literature
to be wrong. If I could have found a 550 watt microwave like I
planned, everything would have been fine. My first microwave
was that size, but they don't seem to make them that small any more.

Your above answer just proves my point... Lack of Original Research...
had you do your Due Diligence, you would have KNOWN that pulling 100
Amps or MORE thru to small of connectors and wires, in the inverter you
selected, would let the MAGIC SMOKE leak out and your money would be
wasted..... but being Dumber than a Stump, you just forged ahead with
now practical research, into the technology you purchased, and it BIT
you in the BUTT.... Like I stated above "Poor Planning".......
"Stupid is as Stupid does"..... apparently your Momma wasn't as smart as
Forest Gump's Mom....

 

[Tom P]

Gross?

Alle angaben ohne MwSt

 

[Tom P]

I agree. I have a Casio HS-7 solar powered calculator. I got it when I
started teaching in 1980. It's battered, but it still works perfectly
today (and actually in lower light intensities than a more recent
one). It's working **31 years** after being bought and I see no reason
why it won't work in another 31 years time. I think it will see me
out. I know it is not the same as rooftop solar panels, but it does
illustrate that this kind of solid-state technology can be extremely
reliable.

I find the discussion about ROI, guarantees etc etc fascinating... I
wonder how many of the people poo-pooing PV panels here pay as much
attention to the TCO of their new cars costing 2-3 times as much as a
roof full of PV panels, not to mention whether the car will still be
working in 25 years time and how much it will still be worth?

And yes, the panels have a guaranteed profile for performance over 10 years.

 

[Giga2]

Good point Dawlish, I've got similar calculator and feel no great need to
replace it.

I find the discussion about ROI, guarantees etc etc fascinating... I
wonder how many of the people poo-pooing PV panels here pay as much
attention to the TCO of their new cars costing 2-3 times as much as a roof
full of PV panels, not to mention whether the car will still be working in
25 years time and how much it will still be worth?
lol


And yes, the panels have a guaranteed profile for performance over 10
years.

That is an ENORMOUS guarantee period! To offer that you have to be pretty
confident that 90% of them will be fine 15 years out, let alone 10 I would
think.

 

[Giga2]

Joking aside, I'd put a few up if they WERE a tenth of the price

So would and will everyone else, that is why renewables will explode given a
bit of a nudge IMHO.

and doing
so didn't cost everyone else money in the form of higher electricity
prices. The cost of panels isn't the only factor to be considered when
deciding to install them; like wind turbines, without generous Feed in
tariffs working alongside the Renewables Obligation they would never pay
their way. Currently these measures are adding around 15% to all fuel
bills
and that's expected to rise significantly as penetration levels increase.

If you personally choose to pay for your panels I don't see why everyone
else shouldn't be just grateful for your investment?

These are tough times for many people though. The government has said it
will review FITs with a view to delivering £40 million of savings (around
10%) in 2014/15. How they intend to do that is anyone's guess. Reducing
the
guaranteed price perhaps? The DECC says "The review will be completed by
the end of 2011, with tariffs remaining unchanged until April 2012" but
add
... "(unless the review reveals a need for greater urgency)."

Considering the fact that renewables subsidies are expected to amount to
around £5 billion in 2020

Good, could be more though!

 

[Giga2]

news:[email protected]... [..]
Oh yeah, opportunity cost. Always easy to forget. I think 5% is a
reasonable estimate for such figures. So the question is will it still
be worth quite a lot in 15 years?

No.

Because the newest generation panels will be better and a 10th of the
price?

Joking aside, I'd put a few up if they WERE a tenth of the price and
doing
so didn't cost everyone else money in the form of higher electricity
prices.

Cost isn't the issue, cost /effectiveness/ IS.

As soon as they are cost effective, I'll install them.

At current prices, they are NOT cost effective, so why would I install
them?

Maybe to do something for the general good?

 

[Giga2]

[..]
Oh yeah, opportunity cost. Always easy to forget. I think 5% is a
reasonable estimate for such figures. So the question is will it
still be worth quite a lot in 15 years?

No.

Because the newest generation panels will be better and a 10th of the
price?

Joking aside, I'd put a few up if they WERE a tenth of the price and
doing so didn't cost everyone else money in the form of higher
electricity prices.

Cost isn't the issue, cost /effectiveness/ IS.

As soon as they are cost effective, I'll install them.

At current prices, they are NOT cost effective, so why would I install
them?

The cost of panels isn't the only factor to be considered when deciding
to install them; like wind turbines, without generous Feed in tariffs
working alongside the Renewables Obligation they would never pay their
way. Currently these measures are adding around 15% to all fuel bills
and that's expected to rise significantly as penetration levels
increase.

These are tough times for many people though. The government has said
it will review FITs with a view to delivering £40 million of savings
(around 10%) in 2014/15. How they intend to do that is anyone's guess.
Reducing the guaranteed price perhaps? The DECC says "The review will
be completed by the end of 2011, with tariffs remaining unchanged until
April 2012" but add ... "(unless the review reveals a need for greater
urgency)."

So, how exactly does government 'reduce the price'?

Feed in tariffs are set by the government.

Subsidies don't reduce price, they just shift costs from one person to
another through compulsion.

Correct.

From somebody who is not doing there 'bit' to someone who is!

 

[Giga2]

Presumably. Also, it will have depreciated and have virtually no resale
value.

If you think you could get Toms PV instalation for around $1000 in ten years
time why do you doubt renewables?

 

[Giga2]

Investment 11690€ net

Predicted output/yr 2.600 Kw
FIT 0.28€/Kw
Revenue 728+
insurance 88-
maintenance 100-
---
Balance 560€ profit

Writeoff PA 5% 584€
Balance 22€ loss
Taxable profit zero

ROI 4.79% tax free

No wonder it already booming in Germany!

 

[Peter Franks]

[..]
Oh yeah, opportunity cost. Always easy to forget. I think 5% is a
reasonable estimate for such figures. So the question is will it still
be worth quite a lot in 15 years?

No.

Because the newest generation panels will be better and a 10th of the
price?

Joking aside, I'd put a few up if they WERE a tenth of the price and
doing
so didn't cost everyone else money in the form of higher electricity
prices.

Cost isn't the issue, cost /effectiveness/ IS.

As soon as they are cost effective, I'll install them.

At current prices, they are NOT cost effective, so why would I install
them?

Maybe to do something for the general good?

I do. And I choose things that are far more effective than me spending
$50K on PV.