Yes we do seem to have side tracked but I think this is what forums are for. Not only to advise but to air views and opinions in the hope that it educates.
As I've always said I'm open minded and that 12 month bill of just 1.25 pounds is very impressive, it is certainly better then I would have thought, and certainly it's better than the normal figures that are given, which I believe is just 125 pounds a year saving on an average bill. You seemed to have surpassed that by quite a margin, unless you annual bill was approx 130 pounds a year without the system.
In fact it is remarkable that in that year you have used perhaps only 16KWh from the supplier at what, is it now approx 8p for a kWh, and as you have a young family and all that entails, and during the harsh winter we had, I'm impressed.
I'm sorry to say Mark I do focus on OAP's and poorer members of our society because they are the ones who struggle to pay their bills,we all struggle to pay bills, but when more than 10% of an income is used on fuel bills it is classed as hardship, and a lot of those I highlight are in hardship, and that was before these Carbon Taxes were introduced. So yes I'm afraid I do resent the fact that these people have to contribute to the benefit of already wealthier parts of society.
But after your figures I'm even more confused on why FIT's are needed. Your system is an average size I believe and I understand that not all installations will be as efficient as yours as obvious factors will come into play. But even a system 50% less efficient would only need to draw approx 25KWh from the grid a year and that would cost just 2 pound a year in electricity bills, that surely is a fantastic incentive on it's own. Of course if you do have the plus of feeding back into the system you quite rightly should be paid for that and perhaps more than the 3p that is now given.
Again Mark I'm going to have to cede to the social scheme your going to hopfully start. I thought, wrongly that it was one of those that have been started where the install is done free of charge, but the companies claim the FIT and the tenant gets the saving on the electricity, though now after your figures if that produces a yearly bill for the tenant of below 10 pounds say that will be a wonderful saving.
Though a bit confused with the part that when you say " The cost will be on the value of the property, no different to what we do on private developments'. Is this a "Green loan" the tenant or the council/housing association will be taking out?
The only thing I have to pull you up on is I never said PV does not work. I only questioned the viablility of it working in the UK without the Tariffs. In my first post I mentioned that when the System is a large free standing type, that as the abilitiy to track the sun through the day for optimum yield, PV can produce good results well worth investing in. I'm just amazed that a static system in the UK of a very small size can yield as much, considering that for 4 months of the year our daylight hours can only average 8-9hrs never mind optimum sunlight
As I've always said I'm open minded and that 12 month bill of just 1.25 pounds is very impressive, it is certainly better then I would have thought, and certainly it's better than the normal figures that are given, which I believe is just 125 pounds a year saving on an average bill. You seemed to have surpassed that by quite a margin, unless you annual bill was approx 130 pounds a year without the system.
In fact it is remarkable that in that year you have used perhaps only 16KWh from the supplier at what, is it now approx 8p for a kWh, and as you have a young family and all that entails, and during the harsh winter we had, I'm impressed.
I'm sorry to say Mark I do focus on OAP's and poorer members of our society because they are the ones who struggle to pay their bills,we all struggle to pay bills, but when more than 10% of an income is used on fuel bills it is classed as hardship, and a lot of those I highlight are in hardship, and that was before these Carbon Taxes were introduced. So yes I'm afraid I do resent the fact that these people have to contribute to the benefit of already wealthier parts of society.
But after your figures I'm even more confused on why FIT's are needed. Your system is an average size I believe and I understand that not all installations will be as efficient as yours as obvious factors will come into play. But even a system 50% less efficient would only need to draw approx 25KWh from the grid a year and that would cost just 2 pound a year in electricity bills, that surely is a fantastic incentive on it's own. Of course if you do have the plus of feeding back into the system you quite rightly should be paid for that and perhaps more than the 3p that is now given.
Again Mark I'm going to have to cede to the social scheme your going to hopfully start. I thought, wrongly that it was one of those that have been started where the install is done free of charge, but the companies claim the FIT and the tenant gets the saving on the electricity, though now after your figures if that produces a yearly bill for the tenant of below 10 pounds say that will be a wonderful saving.
Though a bit confused with the part that when you say " The cost will be on the value of the property, no different to what we do on private developments'. Is this a "Green loan" the tenant or the council/housing association will be taking out?
The only thing I have to pull you up on is I never said PV does not work. I only questioned the viablility of it working in the UK without the Tariffs. In my first post I mentioned that when the System is a large free standing type, that as the abilitiy to track the sun through the day for optimum yield, PV can produce good results well worth investing in. I'm just amazed that a static system in the UK of a very small size can yield as much, considering that for 4 months of the year our daylight hours can only average 8-9hrs never mind optimum sunlight
