XPost: alt.home.repair, uk.d-i-y, alt.sci.physics   
   From: rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com   
      
   "Commander Kinsey"  wrote in message   
   news:op.z2zie8cgwdg98l@desktop-ga2mpl8.lan...   
   > On Thu, 06 Jun 2019 23:12:31 +0100, trader_4    
   > wrote:   
   >   
   >> On Thursday, June 6, 2019 at 6:04:40 PM UTC-4, Commander Kinsey wrote:   
   >>> On Thu, 06 Jun 2019 22:59:47 +0100, trader_4    
   >>> wrote:   
   >>>   
   >>> > On Thursday, June 6, 2019 at 5:45:33 PM UTC-4, Commander Kinsey wrote:   
   >>> >> On Thu, 06 Jun 2019 22:25:56 +0100, Andy Burns    
   >>> >> wrote:   
   >>> >>   
   >>> >> > Commander Kinsey wrote:   
   >>> >> >   
   >>> >> >> I noticed some new houses being built, all with environmental   
   >>> >> >> shit, like   
   >>> >> >> solar panels, water reclamation from gutters etc.  But why do they   
   >>> >> >> have   
   >>> >> >> only 3 or 4 panels when the roof could hold about 12?   
   >>> >> >   
   >>> >> > Very little incentive to have any at all now that the   
   >>> >> > feed-in/bribery   
   >>> >> > tariff has ended.   
   >>> >>   
   >>> >> That's what I would have thought, but these houses are only a couple   
   >>> >> of years old.  None I could understand, loads I could understand, but   
   >>> >> not a few on each roof.   
   >>> >   
   >>> > One factor could be that the output per panel has gone up over   
   >>> > time.  They were ~200W a decade ago, new ones are ~300W.  But still   
   >>> > 3 or 4 would be only 1200W, not even enough to equal what a typical   
   >>> > house   
   >>> > uses.   And you'd think that some of the cost is fixed, ie putting in   
   >>> > 12 isn't going to cost 3 times what it costs to put in 4, so if it's   
   >>> > undersized, the economics is worse.   
   >>>   
   >>> Agreed - you might aswell make as much use of the roof space as you can.   
   >>> And so what if you generate more than the house uses?  There are houses   
   >>> that don't generate anything.  And once we all use electric cars, we'll   
   >>> need a hell of a lot more.   
   >>   
   >> I think in the above you're assuming that you get paid a decent rate on   
   >> the excess, which may not be true.  You may only get wholesale rate,   
   >> which makes it economically unviable.   
   >   
   > Surely you'll make at least roughly what you save by making your own for   
   > what you use?   
      
   Nope, the electricity supplier doesn't pay you anything   
   like what you pay them for the electricity.   
      
   >>> It also seems damn stupid to build an estate of 50 houses and put 1.2kW   
   >>> on each roof, instead of 2.4kW on half the roofs, with a much lower   
   >>> installation cost.   
   >>   
   >> And do what with the owners?  One owner produces the power, is subject   
   >> to the costs and benefits, the other is just another power system   
   >> customer.   
   >   
   > Different people might want it or not.   
      
   But the owner of the house with the panels on it may   
   well not be able to afford the double panel installation.   
      
   >> They do have large solar arrays that are on businesses   
   >> or just on acres of land, generating power for the grid.   
      
   > Yes I know someone who did that on his farm, filling an entire field, but   
   > it was only economically viable because of a subsidy.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)