Solar is still not economic

[JohnB]

I think for a lot of people here there are two elements to PV, and other renewables.

One is energy security in an uncertain future. If the grid goes down or becomes unreliable, you have a roof full of PV that can be disconnected from the grid, and used to keep going. Financial return may be irrelevant, and quality of life and/or survival the priority.

However, the equipment is very expensive, BAU hasn't ended yet, and few people are able, for financial or family pressures reasons, to move their whole life into post collapse mode yet. So for now, FITs help to finance the system, and the financial returns are an important consideration.

[RenewableCandy]

If the 'green supplier' you switch to has a policy of investing revenue in new renewable generation capacity, as Ecotricity does, then switching supplier does just what you intended. CO2 emissions are reduced.

I've decided to give up on the lawn mowing:



http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/p ... aic-france

The polishing's going to be a b***er, though

I think the "gleeful claims of rates of return" are less a matter of simple avarice than an expression of delight that doing some good in life gives one any direct financial benefit at all. That's certainly the case here at Chateau Renewable, and I'd guess also the case elsewhere.

There's also a natural "feelgood factor" about one's home actually producing something (whether it be energy or food). Those here who believe the economy is in for a collapse will feel this stronger than the rest of us.

[An Inspector Calls]

News of claims for the virtues of PV as a tool for reducing carbon emissions are quite surprising.

Looking back on the Solar forum over just the last year, there have been about 900 posts. Searching for "carbon OR dioxide OR emissions OR footprint" brings a mere 19 results. The issue hardly figures large.

Of these, 9 relate to other issues or the proper names of institutions.

The five people who can make any PV carbon emissions reduction concerns based on this count are Aurora, clv101, Pepperman (2), biffvernon (2) and myself (2).

So you'll have to excuse me if I've missed the point that carbon emissions reductions, rather than good old greed, is a burning issue around here.

[goslow]

Yes, that's not surprising as this is a peak oil forum - hence a lot of people are interested in the potential of PV as an off-grid technology. Hard to put a cost value on that.

However it remains true that PV is a low carbon method of producing electricity. Not the cheapest, granted, but being fairly NIMBY proof is one of the advantages.

[An Inspector Calls]

Yes, that's what I thought the forum was as well, albeit not necessarily off-grid.

[RenewableCandy]

Looking back on the Solar forum over just the last year, there have been about 900 posts. Searching for "carbon OR dioxide OR emissions OR footprint" brings a mere 19 results. The issue hardly figures large.

Fair enough. But people don't necessarily spell out their motives so explicitly. Motives are a rum beast and most people often don't even understand their own ones.

Many of us who've put up a grid-tied PV reckon that, if there really is some kind of crisis, we may be able to fix it up as (or pay someone else to fix it up as) a battery-charging system instead, having already bought the most expensive part (i.e. the panels themselves). In the meantime it's nice to know that there is (after a payback time) a Carbon reduction, and there is, at least at the moment, a financial reward.

[hardworkinghippy]

I don't talk a lot about the reasons I decided to get off grid because there are not a lot of "normal" people out there who would want to live the way we do.

To sell the benefits of renewables to the general public, I tend to concentrate on the financial advantages and the degree of independence and freedom from black outs that renewables can offer. Finally I chuck in a bit about it being a responsible thing to do, whilst trying not to shove my green ethics down people's throats.

I feel that folk are becoming blasé about telly adverts telling us to take care of "the planet" with amazing photos of blue skies and windmills and solar panels and the "perfect bliss" music to go with it. I don't want to add to that by being another boring hippy.

Some of you lot who actually get on and do stuff are doing a great job explaining how to do thing practically. People who want to learn how to put together a small, safe system dig deep into their pockets for a few bits of kit and we all know that it's an expensive way to have a few lights, some music and access to internet.

For me and most of my friends the money is not as important as the principle.

[An Inspector Calls]

Looking back on the Solar forum over just the last year, there have been about 900 posts. Searching for "carbon OR dioxide OR emissions OR footprint" brings a mere 19 results. The issue hardly figures large.

Fair enough. But people don't necessarily spell out their motives so explicitly. Motives are a rum beast and most people often don't even understand their own ones.

Well, that doesn't seem to stop the high and mighty:

I don't get any sense that the people here investing in PV are motivated by concerns for their carbon footprint.

This comment shows how little you have really 'listened' to the discussions here over the last few months.