Solar roof panels..

[wolfy 12]

JawD:

I understand the recharge carry on as in alternators and batteries, I have no problem with that.

I can also understand the frequencies and waves having to be in unison, when I say understand it, I mean I can accept what's said in a certain respect.

 

Basically the solar power has to generate electricity at EXACTLY the same frequency as what's coming in from the grid for it to feed back to the grid, is what I'm understanding, which I certainly can't deny as I'm no expert on frequencies and waves in AC power.

 

At least I've had some decent explanations, which is all I asked for , so I'll accept those for what they are even though sending excess energy back this way seems to be hinging on absolute perfection of wave/frequency patterns between the two energy sources.

 

 

 

Anyway, that being said, I still think that there is a con going on, in that what people appear to save won't be any real saving as time goes on as I'm sure with a system like that, it would be prone to breaking down after a few years or even built to break down, costing the householder more in repair costs than the actual saving over time...what's your take on this?

[JawD 99]

Ok, first of all to give you the evidence you like.

[wolfy 12]

I knew you wouldn't take my word for it...have a look at the circuit diagram I put up, that one you're on about is just an indicative schematic representation of what happens, its certainly not an circuit or wiring diagram. In the yank model the cables from the inverter and the cables from the consumers distribution point are joined together before they get to the meter/s. That's how the surplus gets back into the grid, you don't need 2 cables.

As I've said in the post above Paddock, I'm willing to accept this but I do think it's one hell of a risky carry on in how it's supposed to work.

 

I'm just inquisitive that's all.

I appreciate anyone's genuine input and I don't just dismiss anything and everything...I'm just very sceptical with a lot of stuff.

 

I just think how power companies rake in billions in profit and sell on the green way forward, yet there's no way they are there to help people gain while they lose.

 

Can you imagine, if every household decided to go solar power and home wind generation , meaning they could produce 90% of their own energy per year.

What you would find is, the power companies would hike up the 10% needed to such a high price, that all the 90% of your own household generation is rendered useless as in cost saving.

 

This is how power companies work whether it's gas, electric or anything else we rely on.

[wolfy 12]

Ok, first of all to give you the evidence you like.

Won't allow me to see it.

[JawD 99]

That is my outdoor box. From that you can see ONE cable leaving and going down the white pipe. This is my mains supply (ignore the other two cables, they are extras I added to supply other things in the house from the outdoor mains, like the PV Inverter).

 

Re your other points. I'll break them down.

 

- What exactly do you mean by a "con"

- What people appear to save? so far I'm 26% electric use down over last year at the same time period. Add on top of this the FIT payments received.

- Prone to break down? Where did you pluck that one from? What does happen which is where you might get mixed up is the efficiency can drop. You dont get 100% efficiency anyway, that depends on your roof orientation. I get 91% iirc. Over years that may reduce "slightly". Of course the panels need to be kept clean as well. As for costing more in repairs than savings, bullshit. What do you think will need to be repaired exactly?

[JawD 99]

Won't allow me to see it.

 

Mustn't trust you.

[Monroe Transfer 0]

Nah Tapatalk uploads never work.

[JawD 99]

Works for me when I click the link oddly.

[wolfy 12]

That is my outdoor box. From that you can see ONE cable leaving and going down the white pipe. This is my mains supply (ignore the other two cables, they are extras I added to supply other things in the house from the outdoor mains, like the PV Inverter).

 

Re your other points. I'll break them down.

 

- What exactly do you mean by a "con"

- What people appear to save? so far I'm 26% electric use down over last year at the same time period. Add on top of this the FIT payments received.

- Prone to break down? Where did you pluck that one from? What does happen which is where you might get mixed up is the efficiency can drop. You dont get 100% efficiency anyway, that depends on your roof orientation. I get 91% iirc. Over years that may reduce "slightly". Of course the panels need to be kept clean as well. As for costing more in repairs than savings, bullshit. What do you think will need to be repaired exactly?

Ok I probably didn't make myself clear.

 

I didn't say it does cost more in repairs, I said as time goes on, basically it wouldn't surprise me that they will be built to only last a specific amount of time before needing repair, rendering savings virtually zilch.

 

All I'm saying is, the power companies are not there to give people an easy energy ride.

What might appear to benefit us, will be took away in massive hikes, rendering anything we supposedly use as green as of no consequence saving wise.

 

At this moment in time, you are saving right?

 

So will many others I assume as it has to appear to be having the desired effect...but the more people that subscribe to the greener energy , the more the power companies will add on to the bills, plus I could see future solar panels being made to break down costing a fortune to replace or repair.

 

That's just the way I see things because I don't think power companies are there to do anyone any favours in the long term.

[JawD 99]

Ok I probably didn't make myself clear.

 

I didn't say it does cost more in repairs, I said as time goes on, basically it wouldn't surprise me that they will be built to only last a specific amount of time before needing repair, rendering savings virtually zilch.

 

Ok, you need to understand that PVs are built by companies like Sharp and Samsung and not the power companies. The whole installation is basically an inverter and panels. The panels are the least likely to fail as if they do fail it will be segments and not the whole panel due to its construction. The inverter I guess could fail like any electronic item but to say it may outstrip savings is basic scare mongering.

 

 

All I'm saying is, the power companies are not there to give people an easy energy ride.

 

Totally agree.

 

What might appear to benefit us, will be took away in massive hikes, rendering anything we supposedly use as green as of no consequence saving wise.

 

Who will take what away?

 

The government has taken some away as they reduced the amount you get back under the FIT scheme. But the agreement is that it cant be changed, only new installs can change. So you cant get one FIT now and a different one later.

At this moment in time, you are saving right?

 

Correct. Lower usage + FIT payment.

So will many others I assume as it has to appear to be having the desired effect...but the more people that subscribe to the greener energy , the more the power companies will add on to the bills, plus I could see future solar panels being made to break down costing a fortune to replace or repair.

 

Power companies may add to bills I agree, but everyones bills, not only those with PV and thus savings will remain for those with PV.

 

That's just the way I see things because I don't think power companies are there to do anyone any favours in the long term.

 

Of course they are not, but the scheme is not lead by the companies either. Even without the FIT payment, I still have self production which is nothing to do with the energy company.

[wolfy 12]

Ok, you need to understand that PVs are built by companies like Sharp and Samsung and not the power companies. The whole installation is basically an inverter and panels. The panels are the least likely to fail as if they do fail it will be segments and not the whole panel due to its construction. The inverter I guess could fail like any electronic item but to say it may outstrip savings is basic scare mongering.

 

 

 

 

Totally agree.

 

 

 

Who will take what away?

 

The government has taken some away as they reduced the amount you get back under the FIT scheme. But the agreement is that it cant be changed, only new installs can change. So you cant get one FIT now and a different one later.

 

 

Correct. Lower usage + FIT payment.

 

 

Power companies may add to bills I agree, but everyones bills, not only those with PV and thus savings will remain for those with PV.

 

 

 

Of course they are not, but the scheme is not lead by the companies either. Even without the FIT payment, I still have self production which is nothing to do with the energy company.

I agree that those who don't have solar will obviously see a massive hike whilst those who have will still benefit from their own generated energy and so cutting their own costs against those who don't have it, yet what I'm saying is...although the saving will still look good for you, it will only look good when compared with someone who doesn't have it, yet in time, the bills will be hiked up massively, forcing those who can afford it to do the same as you.

 

Basically what I'm trying to say is, let's assume you save 200 quid a year on your bills as opposed to your neighbour, also assuming you both used the same amount of energy.

Now although your neighbour is up in arms over paying 200 a year more than you, it makes you feel good, knowing your panels are doing the job for you.

 

A few years down the line, your 200 a year saving has been whittled away by the power companies hiking it up, so compared to previous bills, you are back to paying the same amount as your next door neighbour did those previous years, while your neighbour is still fuming because now their bill is double what they paid previous, meaning you still save against them, yet the real savings have become pointless in reality if you actually didn't compare them to your neighbours bills.

 

I know it sounds a bit daft but I'm just pointing pointing out how energy companies claw back their money by being sly as fuck.

[JawD 99]

I agree that those who don't have solar will obviously see a massive hike whilst those who have will still benefit from their own generated energy and so cutting their own costs against those who don't have it, yet what I'm saying is...although the saving will still look good for you, it will only look good when compared with someone who doesn't have it, yet in time, the bills will be hiked up massively, forcing those who can afford it to do the same as you.

 

Basically what I'm trying to say is, let's assume you save 200 quid a year on your bills as opposed to your neighbour, also assuming you both used the same amount of energy.

Now although your neighbour is up in arms over paying 200 a year more than you, it makes you feel good, knowing your panels are doing the job for you.

 

A few years down the line, your 200 a year saving has been whittled away by the power companies hiking it up, so compared to previous bills, you are back to paying the same amount as your next door neighbour did those previous years, while your neighbour is still fuming because now their bill is double what they paid previous, meaning you still save against them, yet the real savings have become pointless in reality if you actually didn't compare them to your neighbours bills.

 

I know it sounds a bit daft but I'm just pointing pointing out how energy companies claw back their money by being sly as fuck.

 

So what you are saying is, in a few years Ill still be saving £200 while my neighbour will be fuming as he is paying £200 more.

 

sounds fine to me Im still saving £200