I read in Saturday's guardian (21/03/09) that the UK government quitely withdrew grants for solar panels last week. Not sure if this would be just England or all UK. Anyone have more info on this? Bad, bad, bad.

we should all speak to our MP's about it.

If enough do then they might listen!

In Ireland last year grants were abolished for solar panels ( and other renewables) for new houses because the newly introduced regs makes renewables mandatory -

However

In my opinion the Regulations are flawed . You must provide a blanket minimum of energy per m2 irrespective of how low you take your energy demand down

A B1 ated house may require only 75kw/hr/m2 per year
or
An A3 rated house may require only 50kw/hr/m2 per year
Or
An A2 rated house may require only 25kw/hr/m2 per year

but in any event you must provide

• 10 kWh/m2/annum contributing to energy use
for domestic hot water heating, space heating
or cooling, or
• 4 kWh/m2/annum of electrical energy, or
• a combination of these which would have
equivalent effect.

There ought to be a sliding scale but there is not

Rrenewable energy technology i.e.is defined as

"technology, products or equipment that supply energy derived from
renewable energy sources, e.g. solar thermal systems, solar photo-voltaic systems, biomass systems, systems using biofuels, heat pumps, erogenerators and other small scale renewable systems."

There is a massive mistake here in the regs . Focus ought to be on reducing energy demand not supporting expensive technologies .

Return On Investment ( ROI ) does not come in to it - which is why in my opinion it is regulatory requirement . Because left to ROI - who would invest in renewables at their current costs. By supporting these industries in this way - the regs will see the high costs maintained .

Shamefully this State is ignoring the low hanging fruit ( 1 in 4 houses in Ireland have NO attic insulation ) and failing to relieve fuel poverty in Ireland and kick a huge dent in our national CO2 emmisions and to focus instead on making the rest of us mis spend ( expensively ) on the hi tech stuff . We are also avoiding grasping the nettle that taxes must be raised to massively overhaul our electricity production methods to make that more efficient .

We take the bitter pill easier with grant assisted panels and wood pellet boilers etc still for refurbishment works . In the past 5 years approx €50 million has been thrown away on those lucky enough to build their own homes .

The lone parent / handicapped / aged etc , who sometimes have to choose between heating ... and eating - received ..... €7.5 million in attic insulation , draft stripping lagging jackets etc via grant assisted charities .

Talk about cart before the horse !

You guys doing any better than us on this score ?

I believe grants are not the way ,
perhaps "low interest goverment backed home energy effiecency loans" would be better
as this would let the market sort out whats really works and is cost effective, whilst subsidising
and stimulating innovation in the green sector
as sinnerboy said
Focus ought to be on reducing energy demand not supporting expensive technologies .

Well I disagree. The LCBP only introduced about £10-20 million of funding towards households. That's not a lot towards the cost. But I do agree it distorted the market, by encouraging people to take up otherwise very very expensive stuff, it became just expensive! But, I agree, it does skew the industry some what and make it grant dependent.

If you want to look at energy effiency this isn't the right grant pot. For that you look at CERT. Which in comprison has about £3 billion over 3 years. Or about 100 times as much money as the LCBP.

Saying we shouldn't fund renewables at all, is a bit like saying we shouldn't fund cancer research, only treatment. I.e - what are we going to do in future?. One of the pre-requisites for LCBP money was that you have all the basics, cavity walls, loft insulation, low energy bulbs, heating controls and TRV's etc - before you can get the grant. If someone then has £7,500 lying around, the gov were willing to add £2500 to it. The government's intention was to help get an industry started, without knowing up front which technologies will be best in all situations they adopted a "support everything" approach.

But with hindsight I think everyone now knows that Feed in tariffs are best, as people are then free to choose any technology - with 1 kWh generated being worth 1 kWh of grant. So then you can choose the best for your site, based on prospective generation / capital cost. Although I see in the current consultation, some might get uplifted to help stimulate take up if they are expensive. The main point is from next year if you install a 500W wind turbine behind a row of trees, you'll not get much feed in ROI. Or if you want to spend £10,000 on PV, you'll not get £2500 up front, but about £150-200 on top of what it saves you having to buy. Or a net benefit of about £300-500. I make that an ROI of about 5% a year (tax free equiv). I.e. better than leaving it in your building society account.

Quoted figures for expected feed in rates are between 16p and 22p kWh. I see a revolution coming!

My main problem is , erm , I'm not sure if microgen is the right approach. When you looks at nanosolars "Municipal scale solar Farm" approach, and offshore wind. Renewable doesn't have to mean small. You get better economies of scale with larger installs. The one I'd stick on though, without a thought - solar thermal. I think we should maybe stop giving grants for the rest until we have 50% of homes with it (i.e. the one's with north/south facing roofs). Why? Because PV costs about £3000 kW Peak install and doesn't work in winter. At least hot water can be used all year round.

I'd next go for large scale wind at < £1000 kW. With potential to generate when it's dark and in winter. Once we get closer to 20% wind on the grid then look at other things. And only support grant for heat pumps if the house is not on the gas grid or is going to be GSHP not ASHP.

Simon

Posted By: Jeff BGentlemen - are we talking about PV panels only here or both PV and solar heating?

Solar PV only by lookng at the petition.

I think the PM needs the money to support the banks and car giants.

SimonH - just a quickie, what do you class as "large scale wind turbines" for the price to be <£1000/kw

I have just been quoted £30K for a 6kW proven unit (installed), and would love to know what rating you are basing his cost on. Your cost makes the payback very attractive indeed!

Moderator - thanks for that. Quite relieved to read your response as I had solar collectors installed last November and was looking forward to receiving the grant sometime soon!

I'm new to this forum. Was thinking of solar panels but am now swayed by the wind idea. However, i live in a small block of flats (six households), relatively new build (ten years) and in keeping with conservation regs. It's pretty windy here most of the time (East Lothian, near the coast) and I think a turbine would be the way to go. Doubt the neighbours would go for it, but I'd cross that bridge when I come to it.

Any help with costs, etc and how to proceed?