Solar Heating / Wind Power / Solar Power / UK Grants

I have some questions regarding solar heating / power / wind power and
UK grants. I'm interested in experiences rather than straight facts as
many of these are on the internet:
(1) We're considering ploughing some money into some a renewable power
source for our home. I knew of government grants, but I also recall
reading recently that the grants were either being cancelled or cut
back substantially. Has anyone taken advantage of such a grant
recently? Does the installation company sort it all out or does the
consumer have to claim it back themselves?
(2) Of the various options available (I can think of at least three)
has anyone any experience across each type? Are some more effective
than others in terms of energy return for a UK home? Are some more
problematic regards installation?
(3) Installation companies are many, I know that BP have a solar
business and will more than likely have a list of contractors on their
books. I would feel a little safer dealing with a large organisation
but I don't expect they will be as cheap as others. Again if anyone
has any experience I would appreciate this.
Reply to
All I can say is that IMHO the consensus among those here that can count beyond ten without taking their socks off, is that none of them will ever realistically pay for themselves in this country. Even WITH a grant.
Since I can see no significant cost savings in using any technology based on (domestic) wind or solar in this country, I haven't even bothered to see who is painting themselves green by selling it.
It really doesn't matter who you buy it from. Or if it works or not. Its money down the drain. Just a sop to your conscience. And a show off to the neighbours.
Reply to
The Natural Philosopher
On Mon, 7 Jan 2008 14:18:20 -0800 (PST), wrote:
The Nat Ural Phil Horse Offer has covered the basics.
I'd just like to go on to say that IMHE of these grant aided schemes the sole Benny Fishery of the grant money in every case has been the contractors doing the installation. The stable market cost of the project that the market will bear just gets inflated by the contribution from the grant.
Reply to
Derek Geldard
You might want to look at things like air or ground source heat pumps. These do have a reasonable chance of giving you a return on your investment.
Reply to
John Rumm
In article , John Rumm writes:
If the retailer can be bothered with the extra paperwork, heat pump technology heating for domestic use should only attract 5% VAT.
Reply to
Andrew Gabriel
Maybe depends how much alteration has to be done to the heating system. The heat they produce is "low grade" suitable for underfloor heating but not for, AIUI, heating domestic hot water or conventional, radiator based space heating.
The Natural Philosopher is an accountant; the *only* thing that matters is the bottom line. Whilst that is a factor it is not the overiding one for many.
Grants can help the costs but generally you are then tied to using "approved" installers and systems. You don't get much, if any, flexabilty to design a system to suit your requirements, property or have a combination of energy sources. Personally I don't like being told which contractors I can use, particulary when I'm not in control of the project.
Reply to
Dave Liquorice
But before you do *any* of this; insulation, insulation, insulation. Treble glaze. Line the walls. 1000mm (I made this figure up) of insulation in the loft. Heat recovery ventilation. Insulate the hot water pipes.
Reply to
On Mon, 7 Jan 2008 14:18:20 -0800 (PST) someone who may be this:-
One of the facts that can be found on Internet is that there are no UK grants for such things in the domestic sphere. If you tell us which country/province/principality you live in then we may be able to help you more.
Before doing that make sure you have done as much as reasonable to reduce energy losses. Lagging hot water pipes, loft and wall insulation, energy saving lamps, no fancy lighting schemes designed to make your meter spin round like a catherine wheel and so on.
The ones in England were still in a mess the last time I checked, which was some months ago.
The approach is generally that the householder applies for the grant, perhaps with the help of a supplier. However, the precise approach depends on the country/province/principality someone lives in and the precise grant.
Note that the grants discriminate against DIY. They are only available for "professionally" installed systems. There is also a discriminatory regime on VAT, again discriminating against DIY.
If you have the skills and time it is likely to be cheaper to DIY, despite the discrimination.
formatting link
is a good source of parts for DIY.
In terms of energy they are likely to be solar thermal, wind and solar electric in your list. However, it does depend on your site.
Do a bit of research and you may find a local organisation which offers help to wade through the options
formatting link
is an example.
formatting link
is a guide to some of the options. You may be able to rule some of them out quickly, but others may be worth investigating.
What installation problems there are depends on your particular house. For example fitting solar thermal to a house which has a combination boiler which cannot accept warm water is rather different to fitting a Solartwin panel
formatting link
to a well insulated existing hot water cylinder.
Reply to
David Hansen
On Mon, 7 Jan 2008 14:18:20 -0800 (PST), wrote:
Grant availability is inconsistent but some companies are particularly adept at managing the grant process. It is fairly straightforward and they seem to be able to get approval quickly. The only problem is that the companies approved under the grant schemes have almost universally inflated their prices by at least the value of the grant so the end user gets no benefit from them.
For most of the UK roof mounted wind turbines are useless other than as a green fashion statement, There is an ongoing project in Warwickshire (The Warwickshire Wind Energy Project) assessing their effectiveness and although little factual information is being released so far the monetary saving has been in the order of a few pence a day. Typically in an urban environment you will generate electricity worth about £4 in one year. The problem is the lack of wind in urban environments coupled with the inescapable cube law on energy produced against wind speed. A figure often bandied about is that the "average" windspeed in the UK is 5.6m/s . Assuming that produced 100W output from a generator if the wind speed dropped to 3m/s (higher than that being measured on houses in the Warwickshire trial) the electricity generated falls to about 12W.
Hot water systems are simple but generally have inflated installation prices, they only make economic sense if done as a DIY project. I had one for some years and it was an interesting experiment but not much more. The DTI carried out a 12 month trial of various panels and found that a single solar panel of any type if optimally sited would collect about 1MWh of energy in one year, equivalent to a saving of about £40 if you use gas to heat your water. It would cost between £2,000 and £8,000 to install commercially. Vacuum tube collectors are more efficient than flat panel but tend to be made into smaller panels so generally there isn't much difference between panels. There is very little difference between manufacturers. Navitron are worth looking at for DIY bits as their prices for the vacuum tubes are quite good.
Solar PV is useful in remote sites where there is no mains electricity. Its cost is prohibitively high except in these locations or to power individual low consumption devices. The roughly 1sqm BP panel I have as an experimental setup originally cost nearly £1,000 and produces about 60W in bright sunlight but today for example, with a very dull overcast, is producing about 3W. It makes no economic sense if grid electricity is available as the payback period is much longer than the panel life.
A problem with solar energy in the UK is that there isn't much sun when its needed and most comes at the time of least energy usage.
The great majority of "alternative" energy companies are out and out fraudsters. Almost universally they make vastly inflated claims for the capability of their products. The skill levels generally in this sector are poor and although there are some enthusiasts who are also competent it is difficult to find them.
In financial terms none of the three common technologies make sense. Air source heat pumps (inverter air conditioners) can. Ground source heat pumps are beginning to make sense especially if you have a lot of land and are planning major works anyway but don't work too well unless you have underfloor heating. They are also no better than a good condensing boiler in terms of heating costs or carbon emissions.
There is some data on ground source heat pumps from the Barratt Chorley experiment (which used a 30M borehole rather than a widespread network of pipes so is better suited to urban environments) which indicates a payback period of about 15 years.
formatting link
is universal about all the ecotechnologies is that the potential energy generation or saving is invariably grossly overstated and this is becoming clearer now actual measurements are beginning to be made public.
There is no doubt that if you spent the money you were contemplating spending on alternative energy on insulation and better and more controlled ventilation and heating you would get better value for money.
Reply to
Peter Parry
I resent that. I am an engineer,who has learnt the hard way that the recipe for good engineering is to do the difficult sums. The ones with pound signs in them.
The fact that these technolofies do NOT pay for themselves, in an era when the cost of fuel tends to dominate the price of anything manufactured, shows that if they are not cost effective, they likley are not fuel efficient either.
> > Grants can help the costs but generally you are then tied to using > "approved" installers and systems. You don't get much, if any, flexabilty > to design a system to suit your requirements, property or have a > combination of energy sources. Personally I don't like being told which > contractors I can use, particulary when I'm not in control of the project. >
Reply to
The Natural Philosopher
You will do better to make a huge double glazed south facing set of windows, in terms of overall cost benefit, than anything else.
Insulation and draughtproofing aside.
Reply to
The Natural Philosopher
In article , snipped-for-privacy@b.c says...
While that's almost certainly true of commecially available systems, if you can make your own solar HW system with scrounged bits you could probably save a bit of money - but it's not going to be a lot.
Reply to
In article , snipped-for-privacy@b.c says...
Passive solar gain can make quite a difference in the autumn and spring. Since finishing the conservatory we've noticed we can do without the heating until it's quite a bit colder outside (on sunny days) than we could before. Opening the door allows the conservatory to heat the whole house during the day and, with a sunlit concrete floor, for a couple of hours after dark, too.
Reply to
I'm still to be totally convinced by heatpumps. COPs of 4 and even 5 are advertised by manufacturers, yet the only real world figures I've been able to find are 2 or a bit better - and that's ground source with UFH and plenty of insulation. I know that with green technologies in the home it's compulsory to exaggerate about their performance, but I simply couldn't buy a heat pump from someone who I know is lying to me. Also, when it comes to payback, the additional cost of UFH etc. is not factored in. I know some manufacturers say you can use radiators, but they already lied about the COP, so I don't believe them.
What sort of COP can air source heat pumps really achieve on average throughout a heating season, with radiators, and supplying hot water?
Reply to
In article , Skipweasel writes:
More attention to both desirable and undesirable solar gain in house design would probably bear more fruit than many of the pointless energy saving schemes which currently have the public attention.
Reply to
Andrew Gabriel
I'd agree, they only really make sense in a new build where you are installing underfloor heating and you don't have mains gas and don't want an oil tank or are worried about future oil price. Compared with bulk Propane or electricity they would be a good choice but not otherwise.
Reply to
Peter Parry
On Tue, 08 Jan 2008 14:58:20 +0000, Peter Parry wrote:
I wonder if they would make sense with a 30m deep borehole in central london, assuming you could miss all services/tubes, for a block of flats with about the best insulation you can get and underfloor heating via an overly optimistic solar thermal plus other renewable support ;-).
Reply to
i SECOND HUGE on this the best return is on insulation and design
I have - as a matter of interest - also installed a heat pump and did most of it myself but got the contractor to fill up with glycol and to switch it on and on that basis can apply via him for a grant Chris
Reply to

Site Timeline Threads

  • Soooooo since no one is mentioning building something I'll mention the POS I...
  • site's last updated in


HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.