Is now the best time to buy solar panels?

I have been looking at houses recently and realise just how ugly solar panels (PV and water) are. On the other hand, the demand for energy is such that perhaps we just have to put up with the appearance, as we have with TV aerials and satellite dishes. It would be good if new housing and other buildings were built with solar panels fitted and orientated so as to get the maximum benefit from the sun. Surely it must be possible to design solar panels that are more visually acceptable. With existing housing, the opportunity to install solar panels will depend on various factors. I feel they could look less visually intrusive if they were part of a roof rather than bolted on to it.

With solar PV, I don’t think anyone should receive more via the feed-in tariff than what they would pay for the same electricity.

The feed-in tariff was originally introduced by HMG because they would not give grants for solar panels so making the price on a par with electricity prices would null the incentive for installing them . Exactly on par with the governments policy of removing green energy as a means of supplying English Electricity via grants to be removed in April 2016, and substituting nukes.

“how ugly solar panels….”. I agree . We happen to live in an area with strict planning laws, including a village plan. These control the development and alteration of properties and specify the types of materials that can be used, including the colour and material of roof tiles, to preserve the character. But then you can covour your roof with solar panels! Whatever the enery benfits it just makes a nonsense of planning objectives.

I see little point in having individual installations of PV panels when much larger, more economic, installations could be created that would feed into the grid. Plenty of large commercial and industrial roofs available as sites.

One of my friends lives very close to a very rural area that is heavily protected for its wildlife (SAC, SPA, Ramsar and SSSI), which in theory should make it difficult for development. Apparently the rules are being ignored there so I am not surprised that solar panels are appearing in villages. As energy prices rise there will be more demand, so hopefully the appearance of solar panels can be improved.

I should be very pleased if there were no more incentives to install solar panels [such as feed-in tariffs that exceed the normal consumption tariff]. The only people I see who seem to be benefiting from this scheme are those who are wealthy enough to install a lot of solar panels and fortunate enough to have a roof that faces the right way; the “incentive” is paid for by the rest of the population. Installation grants might have been a more equitable way of achieving the micro-generation objective. Perhaps Messrs Miliband and Brown hadn’t thought it through properly.

Some houses near us were built with two large solar water-heating panels on the roof, largely as a marketing initiative I think but the houses were premium-priced accordingly so I hope the owners are finding the extra cost worth while. Although they don’t look too bad – not much different to Velux windows except for their large area – the panels are not exactly integrated into the profile of the roof but just sit on it.

I dislike the arrays of PV panels that many houses have now, especially when, in order to maximise the export potential, they do not maintain a strict rectangular grid but have ‘wings’ at the sides to fit round chimney stacks or dormer windows or to squeeze another one in within the shape of the hipped roof. Panels on bungalows usually look completely out of scale to me but, of course, they often have much larger roofs in order to cover the same area of accommodation.

I wonder if it would be possible to construct a roof of (replaceable) solar PV panels, which might look less visually intrusive than the present designs that look decidedly out of place. That might be an attractive option where a roof is due for replacement anyway.

The only people I know with solar panels have them out of sight at the back of their houses. I have no idea if anyone has solar panels near my home but if they do they are not visible from the road.

So much of the solar panel opportunity is a matter of chance. In a main road I use frequently, and which runs east-west, those houses on the north side have their panels on the fronts whereas those on the south side have them on the rear [for obvious reasons]. Most residents moved there long before the feed-in tariff sprang up and it was a matter of luck if their frontages happened to be facing the sun or against the sun. The residents of the roads that lead off this main road at right angles have not installed solar panels because their roof orientation is not favourable. People in flats or in rented property are generally prevented from having solar panels so it’s a very unequal opportunity.

If you are constructing on the new or replacing a roof there are “solar tiles”……….mini panels without the big frames………They are linked together from the rear as they are fitted with water proof plug/socket arrangement………….I bit more expensive but do look good……………Usual colour which although shinier is not unlike slate
They are in effect a roofing system………complete with dummies for edges and tops plus ridges etc

Solar thermal vacuum tubes dont hide easy and although better output per area it’s not major
Personally I favour flat plate and they have been around in a semi flush form for some years………..Yes look like a big Velux but not those ones that sit proud with pipes coming out of them

The surface mounts are pretty much the only option as a retro fit

I wouldnt know why the builders used surface mount on a new build

I would not like to have panels on the north face of a roof but there are numbers on that for those interested and the real outputs whilst nowhere as good as south or due south were surprising

For a builder to include the panels in the build is a much cheaper option than retro
Everything retro seems to be the same

Interesting, DeeKay. I expected there would be a more pleasing solution but probably significantly more expensive.

Regarding the two houses I referred to with solar water-heating panels – so far as I can recall the panels were fitted direct to the roof timbers but the depth of them means they stand out above the surrounding slates. Possibly, as an afterthought, the marketing department said “put solar panels on” after the roof structure had been designed and constructed and the builders were left to install them as best they could.

Now lets start off straight,,,,,,,,I’m personally no oil painting……..where I live is not picturesque,,,,,,,,,,,,Long mucky lane,,,,,,,Not my doing but I cant chase the tractors that’s what farming is about and if we’re to live in the country this is where we find ourselves
Not the place for an XF Jag but I do like them

A panel as you described set on top of the rafters is a poor fitting of a flush panel I’d imagine………..Never seen such yet……….I’m sure I will but not yet
The Flush panel should have a proper measured frame made into the roof

But if I were building a new house in a nice tidy place I would only want the flush thermal panels…………PV panels are bad enough but thermal with the pipes out of them…………..NNOOoooo
I have fitted a few between our family but a advised a compromise
Both face due south but are vertical on a rear gable……..Like Wave says more by good luck than good guidance…………..maybe,,,,,,,,my children ask me to go look before they bought for these reasons
A vertical thermal works fine as they are all too big for summer anyhow and in cooler times the sun is lower so it seems to work
Our old farm house has 2 big panels hidden behind 2m high x 1m wide rear windows that are part of a 6 pane row……………Not too bad

Anyhow………..I used 2x1m flat plates……….The ones with one big window as such
I bolted them direct to the gable walls above the windows at a “considered” height for appearance…………
Once I had the pipework directly through the wall I then used plastic/upvc barge board and framed them with a frame just thick enough to cover the pipes………..Up close you know what it is but even the neighbours say they are the best looking panels in the village

So with a little effort!!!!!!!!

PV even the retro”on top” type is often not as tidy as it could be
I find many fitting systems sit very proud of the roof………now they cant be tight to the roof because as PV warms it looses a little efficiency so they need an air gap but they do not need 5 or 6 inches…………I am guessing that many installers have chosen the deepest brackets as they will “fit all”…………..I have not came across a “racking system” supplier/manufacturer who dont supply various heights of brackets to suit flat slate through to deep tiles and it is these deep tile brackets that I think i dont like being fitted to slate and normal tiles…………
Next and this is something I’ll use the word hate to describe…………….I hate the ends of the racks left sticking out……………Hacksaw,,,,,,,,,,,,,,Battery grinder but not those 2 or 6″ sticking out beyond the panels…………Again NNOOooooooo

Next is the brackets that as we would say juke up behind the tiles/slates
Those dont need to be right at the bottom were they are ugly beasts like an add on
and is needed is a little care at measuring the job out……………near all of these panels today at at least 1600mm tall,,,,,,,,,,getting a position below tiles is not difficult
Just do it a little tidier and the appearance whilst not perfect as at least made to look like someone tried
The other way that I’m forever seeing is like someone went out of their way to be untidy…………….But this is not rafters,,,,,,,,,these are out for all to see

So although I’m bonkers about the stuff solar panels can be made a little better with a little effort………….even my turbines are not white,,,,,,,,,,,,,,they are a light kinda pascal green with matt black blades and it works and has done for decades

Who decided so many are white………….The planners I’m afraid it seems

Yes Dave -“”greenest government ever ” -Hiiiiiim ! (NOT !) and your right they not only will but have caused many small companies to be in dire straights (and some major companies severe disappointment ) and job losses precisely because those small companies took the government at their word started up or expanded business etc . Ah ! well they can all move to Scotland where addition help will still be forthcoming to keep small businesses operational and extra grants thrown in precisely for green energy where it not only is encouraged but is part of the Scottish government policy which makes the EU comment that Scotland (by itself ) is producing well above the EU quota for green energy . — Now if only Westminster thought the same.

Three cheers for Scotland

Mark hopefully I can answer your question . With the costs of solar panels plummeting (see I CAN praise China for something ) ,the Government has announced plans in 2015 to reduce the FiT in -2016 -by 87 % -after a “rethink ” (I can guess who made them do that ) the Government backtracked and will be reducing it by a “mere ” 64 % (how humanitarian of them ) . And they say it will Quote – still allow households to earn a “”healthy “” 4.8 % return on investment over 20 years . Wow ! does Soros know about this ? BUT there is MORE it has also been announced that the government thinks the ordinary citizen is making too much money out of it (that right ?) so the FiT will be slowly -Phased OUT . Still not enough ? then the Government has “graciously ” decided to, put a CAP on annual new spending for the FiT . The CAP limits the amount of solar panels that can be registered for the FiT each quarter applications after the cap will be placed in a queue for the next quarterly cap . Makes you want to weep !

Feed-in Tariff Quarterly Rates -2016-2019 – Q1 -4.39 (Generation Tariff for < 10KW (p/KWh ) -goes down over the years to -Q1 2019 -3.55 .

There is a large amount of info on windows as solar panels on the Web,as is usual head to the US to get more detailed info . BUT do not fear ! Guess what ? Chris Binns ,Professor of Nanotechnology at Leicester has announced that their nanotechnology has ,in conjunction with EnSol (Norwegian solar power company have developed ==SPRAY on solar panels -very technical the film is composed of metal nanoparticles embedded in a transparent composite matrix and does NOT work on the same principle as solar panels . Even your whole building could be coated with this stuff – “Pie in the Sky ” ? NOPE ! EnSol hopes to achieve a cell efficiency of at least 20 % and have its product ready for the commercial market by =2016.

The deposition of the thin film is done under laboratory conditions so would be supplied as complete panels presumably. “EnSol has established a state of the art deposition facility at it’s laboratory in Bergen. This unique Physical Vapour Deposition system, combines an unprecedented high flux nanoparticle source, with more standard thin film magnetron sputter capabilities. Routine multilayer cell & device fabrication, with nanoparticle, nanocomposite, metal, semiconductor or dielectric materials are possible on 10 cm x 10 cm substrates”

Mark – It might be useful for you to look at the Energy Saving Trust website which gives the unvarnished facts about the changes to feed-in tariffs.

One site says “A typical 4kW solar panel system will generate savings of £8,080 over 20 years and cost around £6,000. That’s a return on investment of over £2,000.”
Proportioning this to your £5000 gives a return of £1733.

If you achieved the average return on premium bonds you’d get back £1473 (assuming you reinvested the winnings).

If you invested in a stocks and shares ISA you should get around £5000 gain, before charges.

If you had an existing £5000 overdraft, I’d use it to pay that off first – it would cost you £159 443.41 otherwise 🙁

You can monitor the contribution of solar power here, John: https://gridwatch.co.uk There is a delay before the figures are updated. I’m not sure about legacy customers, but anyone installing solar panels today would not make much income, so they are likely to run their washing machine, tumble-dryer and dishwasher when the sun shines and use the surplus to heat water if they have a storage tank.

At the time of writing, most of our energy is being produced from gas, a fossil fuel, so that the more we feed in the less gas is used.

Thanks Wavechange. I was assuming that in the current heatwave conditions there would be a surplus of microgenerated energy over requirement leading to a reduction in uptake via the feed-in tariff.

There is a limit to how many washing loads you need to deal with over a short period to take advantage of abundant solar power and tumble dryers must be virtually redundant this weekend.

I must speak to friends who had solar panels installed when the FIT was 44.3p per kWh. I would be interested to know what they receive now. For new users, the rate is miserable and the main benefit is keeping down the electricity bill.

Although anyone with a garden or drying room need not use a dryer in fine weather, those in flats and tower blocks may use dryers all year round and many people use dryers simply to reduce the need for ironing. 🙁 Whatever fed into the grid will reduce consumption of gas.

Presumably the power solar panels can feed into the grid is reasonably precictable from solar forecasts. My impression is that when we have high levels of sunshine we have less wind – at least inland. I can’t find a relationship after a quick look on the web but presume there is one.

Gas powered generation is, on average, around 38% if the total, nuclear around 20% and wind/solar also around 20%. Wind/solar contribution has been highest in Q1 and Q4 in the last couple of years, presumably although solar would be lower wind is consistently more powerful at this time of year, Whether domestic solar has much impact is not visible.

This report is not current but at the time feed-in contributed less than 1% of our energy needs. I have not seen figures for how much domestic solar power reduces overall consumption: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/456181/FIT_Evidence_Review.pdf

A friend had the ‘problem’ that his electricity meter would run backwards and he had to use surplus energy by heating water during the summer months to prevent being recorded as having used a negative amount of electricity when the next meter reading was due. Apparently this was quite common. Eventually he was given a meter that cannot run backwards.

Given that the baseload supply from the nuclear power stations is generally constant because it is neither practical nor necessary to switch the reactors in and out to match demand, gas is the fuel that is most likely to be saved when renewable energy is at its highest output. At times like this I would expect nuclear to account for possibly 40-50% of daytime supply with the balance made up largely of wind and solar. Solar will obviously not be available overnight but overall demand falls away anyway. The grid will take as much wind power as it can get at any time of the day and gas will be the balancing supply.

My point is that following the introduction of many large commercial solar panel arrays, no doubt with contractual supply levels, and with energy conservation measures continuing to advance, I see the grid’s need for domestic microgeneration declining possibly to zero. Apart from any other considerations it is not an efficient way [either technically or administratively] of generating electricity for export to the grid although it will remain a useful power source at the point of installation thus reducing the owner’s energy costs.

Now that the incentives for installing solar panels have shrunk I doubt there will be much expansion of domestic microgeneration, with the possible exception of new-build properties where it is cheaper to provide the systems comprehensively during construction although water heating might be preferred to electricity generation.

Even during the current sunny weather, gas is making a major contribution to meeting our demand for electricity. At present gas is a relatively cheap fuel but prices will rise for all users when supplies become depleted. As our sustainability Convo is starting to explore, we are living beyond our means and future generations will suffer from the profligate behaviour of society.

Last night I visited one of the village pubs with a friend and while we were discussing the fact that it was still rather too warm, we overheard someone asking for the heaters outside the pub to be turned on. Fortunately they were able to turn on a single heater, otherwise it would not just us who departed.

I would like to see continued incentives for domestic solar power and for a requirement to fit a solar roof on all new housing.

The incentive for domestic solar power should be, for an unsubsidised installation, whether it will pay back its cost and eventually be cost effective. Any available money for subsidy should, in my view, go to people who are genuinely unable to afford the energy they use rather than to people with sufficient money to fund a solar installation.

In my view it is time we put available money into large scale renewable energy, other than just wind and solar – tidal energy for example, a resource in abundance around the UK that would make a huge contribution to our electricity needs. It is currently expensive in construction cost but when we face an energy crisis i’d suggest the benefit of “green” reliable energy, without waste, from a very long life installation – thinking about our great grandchildren – seems the priority.

In the days when the FIT was far more than the cost of buying energy I suggested that buying energy and selling it to the grid should cost the same and my view has not changed. I would prefer incentives to install solar panels (PV and thermal). Those who can contribute most to feeding in electricity are likely to be those with large homes. I’m happy that those in need should receive most subsidy but even if you offer free solar installation, many could not benefit because their roof is not facing the sun or they live in a flat. I have noticed that those with solar panels can be much more ‘energy aware’ and seek to minimise their use.

I have long been supportive of renewable energy and generally adopting a more sustainable lifestyle. Wind and solar power are now making enough of a contribution to the UK electricity requirements to be taken seriously. Sometimes there are difficult questions to answer. In the case of the proposed Severn Barrage there have been good environmental reasons for not proceeding. We must rely on others to decide whether it is better to produce more renewable energy or to conserve wildlife habitats.

https://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/bills/article-6799495/Are-solar-panels-good-investment-feed-tariffs-slashed.html
This gives a view on the current economics of domestic solar panels. They (Energy Saving Trust) take a 4kWp installation and assess the electricity bill savings likely in different parts of the country, for different hours of occupancy. They price the installation at £6200 and assess the maximum likely annual saving as being in the South of England for full-day occupancy as £220. That is a return on capital of 3.5%. That is about what you’d get on a moderate risk portfolio of investments in dividends, with probable capital growth in the longer term on top of that. Another way of looking at it would be the pay-back period, a minimum of 28 years (but depending, of course, upon how electricity charges rise above inflation). However it is more than likely that all or part of the installation will need renewing in that period requiring a further capital outlay.

According to one article I read a 37 MW solar farm cost £37m to install, around £1000 per kWp. That was 4 years ago so costs may well have dropped, as they have with domestic solar. This compares with a domestic installation at just over £1500/kWp currently.

My post was not about the cost and return on investing in solar panels but some are happy to spend money on cars that will depreciate rapidly rather than solar panels which will offer some return and make a contribution towards more sustainable living. If we only look at economics, no-one would buy a brand new car.

I am not opposed to solar farms, but with a shortage of land it’s not always practical. Solar panels on houses and other buildings take up no additional space.

I was not challenging your post, merely adding to your contribution by pointing out the economics.

Solar panels on houses can look ugly; it seems strange when we have strict planning regulations on the types of building materials – including roofing – that are acceptable that are then totally overturned when solar panels are installed.

Solar farms may go on unproductive ground or on areas where sheep, for example, can still graze.

To fit a solar roof rather than add unattractive panels might provide an acceptable compromise for many. At the moment it is an expensive option. My family are not allowed to have solar panels because their house is listed, but were allowed to put some solar thermal tubes on part of the roof where they can barely be seen.

I never understood why homes with a thatched roof usually have a TV aerial or satellite dish.