Are solar panel installs now free ?

[stillp]

Don't you just hate people who rip off the elderly like that?

 

[ban-all-sheds]

Yup.

Much better to do it stealthily by increasing their bills to subsidise people who want to put useless vanity projects on their roofs.

 

[JohnD]

I thought I heard that the objectionable practice of funding FIT payments from an extra charge on the energy bills of other customers was being discontinued and they would be funded from general taxation, but I can't find a reference.

If true, it would explain Oily Dave's government wanting to reduce FITS, because although they don't care about citizens' electricity bills, they like to cut government spending.

Some sources say that it will only make 50p - £1 a year difference to customers' bills.
http://www.theguardian.com/environm...-cut-under-plans-to-reduce-green-energy-costs

 

[big-all]

it actually annoys me that the poorest in society have to subsidise the richer by stealth
now a 5% tax on energy may not seam a lot to pay for it but when energy costs can be 30 to 50% off your spare income after housing and other non optional costs it can be crippling that off course is on and above the 5% vat on gas and electric

 

[bernardgreen]

Having "free" soalr panels fitted on your roof by a company that leases the space on the roof is fine. Free electricty to you and the comapnsy gets a return from the feed in tariff for the solar generated power you do not use. Very good, free electricity and no investment up front.

The snag is when you want to sell the house, you have in effect a sitting tenant on your roof. The terms of the lease for the solar panels can make it difficult to find a buyer who is prepared to take on that lease.

 

[ericmark]

There are some rent your roof space schemes. There is a problem selling your house with these schemes as clearly the buyer can't fit his own panels and maintenance of the roof is a problem. Most will allow one removal and refit for roof maintenance, but over 25 years that is not really enough. They get the feed in tariff and government grant, you get free power when available.

There is a problem with micro generation in that it must shut down if there is a power failure. The method to shut it down is if the voltage goes high or low then the panel will lock out for a set time. If connection to the grid is lost one by one panels in the street will close down. However any over or under voltage even if not caused by a power failure will also cause panels to lock out. One panel in street OK, but loads of panels and sunny summers day hardly any power being used, but loads being generated and the panels will close down. As each system shuts down then the next one will be able to generator for longer so setting the limit 0.5 volt higher than neighbours means yours is last to shut down. It will also depend how close to transformer. Although the DNO will alter transformer tapping there is a limit. It would seem the rent your roof space schemes often have their limits slightly higher then they should, however once you get panels switching off you can run up high bills where items using that power have not turned off.

The common method to extract max is to use immersion heaters which auto switch on when power is available. Clearly though not coupled to panels with rent your roof space as they get what you export. As to saving we will know in 25 years time. You may save loads next year but what in 10 years time? Will they just stop you fitting your own panels. If rent a roof do not maintain the panels they still get the government payment, but you may get nothing?

 

[JohnD]

The common method to extract max is to use immersion heaters which auto switch on when power is available. Clearly though not coupled to panels with rent your roof space as they get what you export.

No. For a domestic installation, the "export" element of payment does not relate to what you export. It is simply assumed that 50% of what you generate is exported, whether it might actually be 0% or 99%. Most of the payment is for your generated kWh, and the export payment is small.

So the investor who has leased your roof gets the same payment whether you use the power or not, and his payment is dependent only on the Generated figure.

To my mind this is not a good business model. I am more in favour of netting off the power exported to the grid, and the power imported, and making a payment one way or the other for the difference only. To my mind, in that case, the net payment should be at your current retail price of electricity.

I have some difficulty with the government creating a subsidy for electricity which the generating people use themselves, especially when it is not the government that pays.

 

[ericmark]

As far as I am aware this changes once you have a smart meter. Whole idea of a smart meter is it can work out which direction the power is going. Until a smart meter is fitted you are of course correct as they have no idea on how much is exported.

 

[EFLImpudence]

Don't have a smart meter, then - until compulsory.

 

[cjard]

And install an Immersun, to dump all your generation into your hot water tank while continuing to receive the 50% export payment.

 

[PBC_1966]

it actually annoys me that the poorest in society have to subsidise the richer by stealth
now a 5% tax on energy may not seam a lot to pay for it but when energy costs can be 30 to 50% off your spare income after housing and other non optional costs it can be crippling that off course is on and above the 5% vat on gas and electric

The whole principle of adding costs onto electricity bills to subsidize the solar FIT payments was an affront to common sense right from the outset. But then it seems that the world over now governments have decided that so-called "green" projects are to be promoted at any cost, even when the science behind the particular "green" project is dubious at best, and outright fraudulent at worst.

At least here (meaning California specifically) there is no sales tax on electricity or gas. Actually, there's no sales tax on any services, only on tangible goods.

 

[ban-all-sheds]

The whole principle of adding costs onto electricity bills to subsidize the solar FIT payments was an affront to common sense right from the outset.

Worse - it's quite likely to have caused a few extra deaths.

 

[JohnW2]

At least here (meaning California specifically) there is no sales tax on electricity or gas.

Which seems very reasonable. Mind you, as you know, we're not so far behind that over here, with much lower VAT on all domestic fuels than on other goods (5%, rather than 20%).

Actually, there's no sales tax on any services, only on tangible goods.

They presumably have to be quite careful about the wording there - since, in normal terms, oil, coal and gas (but not electricity) are "tangible goods"!

Kind Regards, John

 

[PBC_1966]

My choice of words there, and perhaps not the best choice! I'm sure that the legislation sets it out rather more precisely, but there is no sales tax on gas, electricity, telephone & Internet bills, etc. There are numerous other exemptions for goods as well, e.g. feed for livestock, prescription drugs, and most basic food items (but prepared restaurant meals are taxed).

Most people here are shocked when told about 20% VAT in the U.K. though. Our basic sales tax rate is 7.5% across the state (1% of which goes to the county concerned). Cities can add their own small tax on top if they wish, although many don't. Here in Shasta County, for example, we have only three incorporated cities in the county and only one, Anderson, currently has its own local tax. So buy something in Anderson just a few miles down the road from here and it's 8% tax, buy it here in Redding or anywhere else in the county and it's 7.5%. The highest combined rate anywhere in the state is only around 10%.

 

[JohnW2]

My choice of words there, and perhaps not the best choice! I'm sure that the legislation sets it out rather more precisely, but there is no sales tax on gas, electricity, telephone & Internet bills, etc.

Yes, that's what I presumed you meant!

There are numerous other exemptions for goods as well, e.g. feed for livestock, prescription drugs, and most basic food items (but prepared restaurant meals are taxed).

As you know, essentially the same is true over here (although not, IIRC, in relation to 'private' prescription drugs). In addition to the things you mention, children's clothes and nearly all books, and various other things are either exempt or 'zero rated'.

Most people here are shocked when told about 20% VAT in the U.K. though. Our basic sales tax rate is 7.5% across the state (1% of which goes to the county concerned). Cities can add their own small tax on top if they wish, although many don't.

20% VAT is, of course, quite low in relation to European countries. Most are between 20% and 25%, and only a handful of (mainly small) countries are below 20%. Germany is 19%, and the other sub-20% countries are Cyprus, Luxembourg, Malta, the Azores and the Canary Islands. ... and, of course, at least for people on 'moderate incomes', UK income tax is also towards the low end of EU countries.

... but you haven't lived! Most of those reading this are probably not old enough to remember UK Purchase Tax (which could be as high as 100%, sometimes higher, for 'luxury goods')!

Kind Regards, John