electrical reserve drops to 4%

[FB.]

FB
The installer margins have to support paying towards accreditationS/insurances,tools,test equipment,time spent on paperwork back at the office submitting your installation there's hell of alot to pay out to different bodies before we put a panel on a roof. We don't want to be paying out either if we didn't have to then installer margins could drop too

And the big utility companies aren't bound and gagged with red tape, too?
I'm pretty sick of hearing OFGEM, OFWAT, OFCOM and the Eurocrats keep spouting more and more rules, to the point where more people work as paper-shufflers than doin real jobs which do useful and productive things.

 

[FB.]

No, 6% wouldn't be reasonable, because we don't turn over enough to justify that on domestic installations.From your previous posts it's evident you wouldn't consider a return of 6% on your investments to be reasonable either.

Which is why I decided to reduce my exposure to utility shares recently. The reward doesn't match the risk - therefore investment monies will not be forthcoming for the required infrastructure unless the reward and the risk are in balance.

 

[FB.]

And I bet we (our companies) pay more tax as a percentage of our incomes than the energy suppliers do.

Centrica (British Gas) - or any other stockmarket-listed company you want to look at - have their financial reports available on the London Stock Exchange links here:


Half-yearly Report - London Stock Exchange

Regulatory - London Stock Exchange

 

[moggy1968]

Which is why I decided to reduce my exposure to utility shares recently. The reward doesn't match the risk - therefore investment monies will not be forthcoming for the required infrastructure unless the reward and the risk are in balance.

and there lies one of the fundamental problems with the way business is run these days. If a company invests in a huge R&D spend, profits reduce, the shareholders get unhappy because they aren't making as much money today as they want (never mind tomorrow) so at the moment the principal driver for big business is shareholders filling their pockets in the short term, not the longterm health of the business.

 

[FB.]

and there lies one of the fundamental problems with the way business is run these days. If a company invests in a huge R&D spend, profits reduce, the shareholders get unhappy because they aren't making as much money today as they want (never mind tomorrow) so at the moment the principal driver for big business is shareholders filling their pockets in the short term, not the longterm health of the business.

I coughed-up thousands of pounds when National Grid made a cash-call ("rights issue") in mid-2010 because the rate of return being promised by OFGEM for the projects (a good chunk of which were to allow bolstering of grid connections for renewables in remote locations - offshore etc) was about 10%, which I felt was a satisfactory compensation for the political and regulatory risk.

If the return is reasonable relative to the risk, people and companies will invest.

Investing in companies is fairly risky - and is much riskier than investing in a solar array. Yet a minimum several percent return is desired for "virtually risk-free" solar. So why should investors bother to invest in utility infrastructure whn it's easier to milk the gravy train of Feed-in-Tariffs for decent returns without the risk.
I'd definitely rather milk the subsidised FiT payments than invest in the UK's utility companies: the risk-return is much more favourable for solar PV.

 

[sedgy34]

No, 6% wouldn't be reasonable, because we don't turn over enough to justify that on domestic installations so the PROFIT would be too small.

From your previous posts it's evident you wouldn't consider a return of 6% on your investments to be reasonable either.

I have just quoted on a £280000 install and my margin will be considerably less than 6% if I get the job, but the actual PROFIT is enough for me to be comfortable with. I'd love 6% on a turnover like that, 16k for 3 weeks wirk, terific, but it aint gonna happen!!
At 6% margin on domestic the PROFIT would be unsustainable for us.
Margin doesn't feed the kids, profit does.

Also, people do have a choice about which installer they use. If you think an installer is charging too much, use a different one. A year ago companies were quoting 50% more than us and people were still handing them their money. Thats called a free market. If people are daft enough to pay that kind of money out for an inferioir product, thats up to them.

If you want to cap private business, stifle enterprise and small business development like you suggest then thats communism, and that doesn't work, as has been amply demonstrated many times before. If we do go into that kind of environment then forget about living off your investments, you'll be back on the floor of the state owned factory working for a fixed wage and on a 10 year waiting list for your new car.


The reality, despite the Government statements to the opposite, is there is no real choice about energy suppliers. It all ultimately comes from the same place so there is no real competition in marketplace. The profits are massive, R&D minimal. Energy supply in this country is a scandal.

What area is your quote going to (just hope we are not quoting same job 230kw

 

[moggy1968]

I coughed-up thousands of pounds when National Grid made a cash-call ("rights issue") in mid-2010 because the rate of return being promised by OFGEM for the projects (a good chunk of which were to allow bolstering of grid connections for renewables in remote locations - offshore etc) was about 10%, which I felt was a satisfactory compensation for the political and regulatory risk.

If the return is reasonable relative to the risk, people and companies will invest.

Investing in companies is fairly risky - and is much riskier than investing in a solar array. Yet a minimum several percent return is desired for "virtually risk-free" solar. So why should investors bother to invest in utility infrastructure whn it's easier to milk the gravy train of Feed-in-Tariffs for decent returns without the risk.
I'd definitely rather milk the subsidised FiT payments than invest in the UK's utility companies: the risk-return is much more favourable for solar PV.

I was talking about the utility companies investing in their own R&D, not about investors sticking their money into utility companies vs PV arrays and the original post was about the impending failure of the grid supply as a result of this failure by the utility companies to invest in their own future.

I think this is going off topic now, so I'll leave it there.

 

[moggy1968]

What area is your quote going to (just hope we are not quoting same job 230kw

dorset

 

[sedgy34]

FB, I do not think that a generator gives a stable enough sine wave to be compatible with an inverter on a PV system,also the PV could backfeed the generator which would not be a good idea. Maybe a battery and an inverter may do the job, but it may then cause problems if you are producing more power than you are using, also if a cloud pops over you may not be producing enough power.

It is not so simple, sorry.

New Sma inverter with battery for storage

 

[sedgy34]

It's only just come out in Germany I'm told but a cracking idea for domestic users

 

[jason121]

liquid air is the future

 

[mdovey]

So is this basically a Sunny Boy and Sunny Backup in the same unit?

 

[FB.]

liquid air is the future

I've been using air compressed to 3000PSI (200 atmospheres pressure) for the last ten years, in this thing below, to propel the slugs up to velocities approaching speed of sound.

.

 

[grantr37]

to send you "Back to the Future"

 

[The Solar King]

SMA storage inverter was shown as a 'concept' at Solar Power UK last week. Should come to market Q3 next year. It is proposed to have 2kWh of storage. There was another similar piece of kit from a dutch company. Hugely expensive. Also speaking to someone who had fitted one; had to take it out because of software problems.

On-site storage is likely to be the next big thing for on-site generation. On a large scale the idea of compressed air storage is actually being developed as a viable concept. I think this being done at Nottingham University. Idea will be to have huge bladders on the sea bed which will be inflated with compressed air when wind farms are generating excess energy. (eg at night). Weight of sea water will hold them down. Compressed air will then be released through suitable turbines to generate power at peak times. Same idea as pumped water storage which has been in use for years.