They have brought 3 coal fired stations out of mothballs (due to be scrapped last sept but then kept).with the snow/temps outside - UK's doing well on peak electric/gas
living our best energy consumption
Energy Prices (Strictly NO referrals!)
- Thread starter DXP55
- Start date
At least as big for many is that they either rent, or can't be certain how long they'll be in their current house. It's much easier to drop the money if you expect to be in the house for say 5-10+ years, but if your job doesn't feel secure or you might need to move it's much harder.
I've noticed in my street there are people that have been here for 10+ years and have no intention of moving (some have been here for 25+ years), whilst other houses seem to change hands every 2-5 years.
Soldato
- Joined
- 23 May 2006
- Posts
- 7,910
good point on the rentals. 1 thing i thought about, dunno if viable but given most people accept solar pays for itself after 10 years or so.....
my wife's flat is going to need a full reroofing in the next few years. if a company wanted to (octopus seem the most progressive on such ideas) install solar panels on our flat new roof I would not mind. if they covered the cost and any maintanence I would have no problem them taking all the energy generated for the 1st 10-15 years. (they would need to be responsible for its disposal afterwards too).
given as a long term proposition solar is universally accepted to more than pay for ittself i see no downside to them.
Last edited:
Last edited:
Soldato
- Joined
- 4 Aug 2007
- Posts
- 22,003
- Location
- Wilds of suffolk
Dont think you can on the website oddly
Soldato
- Joined
- 23 May 2006
- Posts
- 7,910
i have the android app and never noticed the option to flip..... am gonna look now!.
edit... its possible i am being a little stupid but i cant see an option to flip on my app. could be ios thing or maybe if you have time of use different costs it cant work it out.
Last edited:
This is why I do not have solar.
If I was in this house 15 years to forever. I'd have it already. But with plan being 3 years max it's a definite no.
Don't know how the typical 'first home' will ever see solar if its not a new build with them already on.
Last edited:
Soldato
- Joined
- 4 Aug 2007
- Posts
- 22,003
- Location
- Wilds of suffolk
Yep this is the issue with solar, it will take a while to payback. Thats never going to change however.
Jury is out for now on how much value will carry over.
For sure some, but the real value will be decided by expected future energy costs and not install cost.
Jury is out for now on how much value will carry over.
For sure some, but the real value will be decided by expected future energy costs and not install cost.
There really needs to be an incentive/requirement to have solar fitted with refurbs and all new rebuilds/extensions with a suitable roof imo, as from what I understand the cost of the panels if fitted during say the roofing stage isn't massively more than the cost of just tiling, especially if they're the panels you fit instead of the tiles.
IIRC in some parts of the world it's becoming more and more normal for new commercial and public properties to get them as standard in part because of the long term savings. I know that Games Workshop have a ton of them, IIRC they built their new factory and run into an issue with the supply company deciding they couldn't supply the new incoming power for a long time unless paid a not so small fortune (the story I heard is that the supply company decided long after GW had checked and built, that they had hit capacity). So they put in the panels in part because it meant they could use some of the equipment and because it would offset itself over time given how much electricity they use.
Mortgage companies really dislike this though. Not too bad if you own the flat outright, but makes life very difficult if you want to sell it for some reason
Soldato
- Joined
- 23 May 2006
- Posts
- 7,910
must be rolled out to ios 1st (it does say beta on your image) Thanks for providing that. i know now i am not being daft as the option is not there for me.
Man of Honour
- Joined
- 5 Jun 2003
- Posts
- 91,549
- Location
- Falling...
It also depends on what you can afford. I dare say some people here spend a lot of money on frivolous things (which they're entitled to!) - which if was saved could easily pay for solar. However I appreciate that 10k+ is not an insignificant amount of cash for people. However there is that immediate benefit of your bills coming down which psychologically has a really nice impact.
Even if we decide to move next year (we won't unless we decide to leave the UK) I don't feel it's a waste as a) you can take your inverter / batteries if you really want, b) it could potentially add value to your home c) it's the right thing to do anyway!
But when it's 10k(+)..thats an expensive "right thing to do".
There's no real information on how it affects house prices. It wasn't long ago it was detrimental (that's what it seemed)
10k is well out the price point for I'd say? What.. 90pc of people?
With cost of living crisis, job security, dumping 10k is not something many could do.
Technically I could. But it just isn't viable. Also, Can easily see paying up on for next year a government scheme to come out to massively help that miss out on. Our you pay, lose your job and really need that 10k
Is incredibly hard to commit to even in good incomes.
Soldato
- Joined
- 4 Aug 2007
- Posts
- 22,003
- Location
- Wilds of suffolk
Yeah my views as well
It has to add some value right now.
Because its got a direct and demonstrateable impact on bills, and many people are now considering them.
It seems to have gone from niche to on many peoples radars in a year.
No real surprise most people are influenced by their wallets more than anything.
I remember seeing an energy company survey analysis. Think it was Octopus who when they surveyed peoples motivations often listed Green as high up, but when they selected their tariff virtually no one selected the marginally more expensive fully green one.
Many of us like to think we do the right thing, but when the £s hit the ground we often struggle.
I really like domestic solar with batteries. Its clearly a very significiant impact and has the potential to really make a big difference.
I don't think it should be given grants etc, but I would not be adverse to government backed low interest loans if people who could benefit cannot afford the outlay.
Now a few months in, and having seen the bad months to me its a total no brainer as long as you have a suitable property.
If I had taken a medium term loan (such as 5 years) I would have struggled a bit in the bad months, but over the year the cost would be very low and of course by the end of the 5 years you would own the panels.
10 year loans would be perfect IMO as 5 year ROI really requires high energy prices and we all hope thats not going to be a permanent thing.
Soldato
- Joined
- 4 Aug 2007
- Posts
- 22,003
- Location
- Wilds of suffolk
It was detrimental when they were not owned was the feeling.
Because you in effect didn't have full control over your own roof.
As ever hastle meant people would look at a house without panels vs one with if they were not owned.
Also energy was cheap. The sheer number of people now asking me about panels at work makes me think that even the less than perfect non owned model would actually now be a positive as opposed to a negative.
Thinking about it the only way I'd accept it right now (knowing I'm moving in 3 years) is if it was done for free but I reaped none of the benefits. But then selling could be an issue. Who wants to inherit a house with solar they can't benefit from? Just too many variables
Is a very difficult nut to crack.
Is a very difficult nut to crack.
Its so new, the change in attitudes, its hard to price in. If there was hard evidence that adding solar added 'at least 5k' onto the value of your house it would be much more palatable to commit.
But we are too new into the positive sentiment phase to gamble 10k+
Soldato
- Joined
- 29 Dec 2004
- Posts
- 17,072
- Location
- Shepley
As above, isn't this potentially where something like Ripple comes into its own? Similar outlay to solar but the benefit is portable.
Soldato
- Joined
- 23 May 2006
- Posts
- 7,910
maybe it is just me but (aside from the fact i would want to buy panels for any house i live in so there is that....) but in principle i would have no issue buying a house with panels on even if i didnt get the benefit.
on the condition that i didnt have to pay to maintain them and on the condition that once they are end of life somone professionally removed them.
panels have more than the obvious advantages... they protect your roof from wear and tear........... and in summer they have been shown to take as much as 2 degrees c off the temp of your attic
So the only reason it would put me off buying a house would be because i would not be able to install my own panels..... however this can be skirted around as well.
lets imagine the system was over 12 years... this seems a fair timeframe for the fitters to make all their money back and then it is owned by the house owner...... then a buy back scheme on offer to the home owner could be put in place where the cost is the original install cost with 1/12 of the price deducted each year after the install period.
i dunno... maybe a total none starter but on the surface at least it seems a no lose scenario to me, as am sure if a company like octopus did this , not only long term would it be cost neutral, they would get all sorts of good press out of it and probably tax breaks etc if done in tandem with government