UK Government To Be Taken To Court Over Feed-in Tariff Cut

Friends of the Earth are taking the government to court over their decision to halve feed-in tariffs (solar subsidies) come December 12th.

Friends of the Earth are arguing that the cut-off date is 2 weeks before the review of the feed-in tariffs was even due to finish and therefore unlawful.

The CBI (who represent UK business interests) have also critisised the government for making the move earlier than planned.

The decision has basically left the whole UK solar industry in chaos: Potential customers scrambling to get panels fitted in time; solar panel fitters desperately trying to organise their schedules to maximise their income while they can; panel fitters trying to source the panels from the manufacturers in time (many failing); redundancies or closure for those companies who can't organise themselves in time; and customers cancelling contracts because they are waiting for planning permission (required in conservation areas and on listed buidings) and have no chance of it being granted in time; and once the deadline has passed there will be a huge fall-off in demand for panels, leading to more redundancies and closures. Effectively crippling a rapidly growing industry.

More here.

Subsidies On Renewables Too High?

You know, we hear an awful lot of whining about how heavily supported this or that renewable is, don't we? For example, in the UK, there's a lot of moaning about offshore wind-farms, and feed-in tariffs on solar panels.

The arguments kind of go along the lines of: They're too high, they're disproportionate, they're unfair.

Really? There are 2 important things to keep in mind here:

Firstly, many governments are committed to renewables legally, economically, and even idealogically.  

For example, the UK is legally bound to get 15% of it's energy from renewables by 2020 (though it's aim is to get to 30%), hence the vast number of offshore wind turbines that are going up around our coast with the blessing and financial assistance of the government.

Meanwhile, the likes of Germany and Denmark see renewables as an economic benefit. Thousands of jobs in a rapidly expanding industry, and an income worth many millions (even billions) from exporting their products and expertise. It makes sense to throw money at something that's going to provide such huge benefits in terms of jobs, exports, and growth.


Secondly, these subsidies are small fry when compared to those being poured into fossil fuels. Worldwide, they are 12 times what they are for renewables! (See here).

Now that is too high, disproportionate, and unfair. In fact, it's downright obscene.

Buying A Solar Panel Part 4

Well, we've had our quotes for the work and we've put down our deposit. The guy we saw seemed to be very good and answered all our questions, no matter how technical.

In the end, we settled on a 12 panel system which will give us 18 Sq. metres generating 2.82 kWp. In other words, on a nice sunny day it will generate 2.82 kW per hour. Enough to power 47 60W lightbulbs.

This should give us a return of £1090 a year and will cut 1.17 tonnes off our carbon footprint.

The fitters have guaranteed the panels will be up and running well before the December 12th deadline (See previous post) or we get our deposit back. Let's hope they succeed - I'm looking forward to seeing how these things perform!

Buying A Solar Panel Part 3

UK Treasury Official

Well, our "greenest government ever" (their words, no-one else's) has done it again.

On Monday (Oct. 31st), the UK government announced it would be halving feed-in tariffs on domestic solar panels installed on or after Dec. 12th 2011. In other words, if you install panels after that, the pay-back period will be around 18 years.

Solar panel installers are shocked by the announcement, which has come out of the blue, leaves them with no time to adjust, and will practically kill off this expanding industry, leading to thousands of job losses.

It also leaves me scrambling to get some panels fitted before the deadline. Oh, and I've also got to have them registered with an energy company before that deadline or it still won't count.

This government doesn't give a damn about green issues, all it cares about is making penny-pinching cuts.

Buying A Solar Panel Part 2

In part 1 I explained why I wanted to have a solar panel on our roof and how I worked out what size system we could get.

This time round I'll be looking into the things I needed to think about/organize before I made the final decision; How I managed to figure out which installers to come round and give me a quote; and what questions to ask them.

Things To Keep In Mind

Fitting solar panels sounds simple enough but there are some things you've got to think about or chase. For example, do you need planning permission? There are various consumer guides (Which? having amassed quite a library of them), and this is the one I used. It explains how FITs (Feed-in Tariffs) work, who you can trust, how free solar panels work, and what you should be considering before you take the plunge, plus what to ask the installation companies.

And, talking of Which?, I found this list of things that a good surveyor should do when they visit in one of their excellent guides (Sorry, I can't find the original link):

• Make written notes of all the measurements, in particular the orientation of the roof.
• Look at the roof – from both inside and outside.
• Use access equipment for closer inspection where roof quality is uncertain.
• Record any possible risk of shade on the roof from trees, neighbouring houses and chimneys.
• Examine the loft and measure the tilt angle of the roof.
• Look in detail at your consumer unit (fuse box) and metering.
• Identify your main electrical appliances and when you use them.
• Look around your house and discuss where to locate cables and equipment.
• Provide an in-depth quote including scaffolding costs, panel/module information, details of warranties, details of the inverter, the company’s terms and conditions, and information on how it has calculated the payback, rate of return and savings.

Which? warn that, despite industry regulation, some solar panel companies are still attempting the high pressure sales tactics so beloved of double glazing and kitchen unit salesmen (e.g. large discounts, today only offers etc.). If they start doing that, then I'll be getting very suspicious.

Looking for an Installer
So, I've got all my questions prepared, I know what to watch out, and I've found out I don't need planning permission, next I need to get a list of 3 installers to bring in to give me a quote.

Normally, I like to go by recommendation from people I know when getting work done on the house. However, I don't know anyone locally who's had panels fitted. That leaves me looking for reviews on the web.

Fortunately I've found 2 useful sites: Here and here. Ignoring companies with very few reviews (Because they might have been left by employees), and choosing from the ones with the best scores, I was able to find my short-list.

And that's as far as I've got.

Next: Getting the quotes.

Buying a Solar Panel Part 1

I've decided to try and get a solar panel fitted to our roof.

As you might expect, I like the fact that it'll cut our carbon footprint (about a tonne for a 2 kWp system), but I've also discovered it's a good investment: It should pay for itself in less than 9 years and, after that, it'll all be money in the bank.

And it'll give us some protection against fuel price hikes.

Trouble is, how on Earth do we go about getting one? How do we find a good installer? How do we work out if our roof is suitable? What size system? What questions do we ask the providers? How long will the system last? And so on.

FITs etc.

One of the things I've been looking into is what sort of income solar panels provide in the UK. It turns out that the return is made up of 3 elements: A Feed-In Tariff (FIT) from the government (currently about 43p per kWh); a payment from an energy supplier for the electric we export to the grid (3.1p per kWh); plus the value of electric we save when using the energy we're generating (maybe 14p per kWh). This might not sound like a lot but this could all add up to over £1000 a year tax-free and inflation proofed, for 25 years. More detail here.

Calculating What We Could Get

According to various sources, solar panels would give us around 9% return on our investment, a better return than any ISA account. This is why there are companies out there who offer to fit and maintain solar panels for free in return for getting all the FIT payments. In fact, if we couldn't afford to buy our own system then these free systems (aka "Roof for Rent schemes") would have been worth considering because they'd still cut our electric bills and carbon footprint.

Anyway, the point is, if it makes sense for companies to give away systems to get these FITs, it would also makes sense for us to own the solar panels ourselves (As long as we don't intend moving house too soon). As big as we can afford or, at least, as big as we can fit on our roof.

So I wanted to know what size system we could get.

For a while I couldn't figure out how to measure the available roof space. Then I realised I was looking at it the wrong way: Why not measure it from within the loft! Duh! I could even get the pitch angle of the roof. The result was at least 2.5 metres by 5, or 12.5 square metres with a pitch of 40 degrees.

I plugged these figures into this handy calculator and found out we could get a 1.5 kWp system that would give us a starting annual income of about £650, and pay for itself in 8 years and 10 months.

Next: So much for what we can get, but how do we get it? How do we find a reliable installer and what do we ask them? I'll be going into that in a few days.

A North Pole Without Ice?

This summer, Arctic sea ice reached it's second lowest extent (i.e. Area covered) since satellite records began in 1979. Throughout this 32 year period the area of ice has been falling, losing, on average, nearly 33000 square miles per year. More here.

As a result of all this, Arctic sea routes like the North-west Passage were ice free yet again. This has only been happening in recent years. This time, the routes have been wide enough for tankers to make it through. Shipping companies are rubbing their hands with glee at the prospect of faster and cheaper trips over the coming decades. More here.

Oil companies are similarly excited about the opportunity to develop oil and gas fields in the Artic Sea that were previously uneconomic because of the hostility of the environment. I find it ironic that an industry that has supposedly invested so much in encouraging climate denial blogs, pressure groups, and politicians, is now set to reap rewards from the effects of climate change on the Arctic.

A graphic illustration of the sheer scale of Arctic ice loss is the fact that a rowing expedition has managed to reach the 1996 location of the magnetic North Pole this year!

Still think global warming isn't happening?

On The Buses

Reg Varney

One of the things we're told to do if we want to cut our carbon footprint is use public transport more instead of the car.

That's okay if you live in a city or big town. The buses/trains are usually regular and you can make use of cheap deals like season tickets. Having lived most of my life in London, I know this for a fact.

Now that I've moved away from the capital, I've discovered just how rubbish public transport can be. So I rarely use it anymore. Or, at least, until I changed jobs a month ago. Now, thanks to there being almost no parking at my new company, I'm forced to use that "rubbish public transport". Oh, the irony.

Still, my experiences so far have been fairly positive.

• Bus frequency: Good actually. Every 15 minutes. Probably because the journey's between 2 sizeable towns. The door-to-door time is reasonable too. Mostly a 50 minute journey compared to 30 to 40 minutes by car.

• Cost: Good. If I compare the costs of driving my Prius to work with taking the bus (using an annual season ticket), they're pretty much the same. That was surprising.

• Comfort and Convenience: It's nice to be able to read a book on my way to work. However, the seats seem to have been designed by sadists, or aliens with no understanding of human anatomy, or someone who came really cheap.  And I'm not looking forward to the Winter - All that waiting around in the cold and rain. Urghh!

• Carbon Footprint: Ah. Here's the bad news. According to my friendly carbon footprint calculator, going to work by bus (7000 miles per year) adds 0.33 tonnes to my footprint (Compared to my car). This is despite the fact that I'm sharing the bus with some 50 others!

So my opinion of public transport in 'the sticks' is changing. As long as you live in a decent size town, the buses are regular. Smaller towns and villages are less well served.

Costwise, you've got a good chance of saving money on your daily commute. But you need to work out the costs quite carefully, I don't think season tickets will work out cheaper for everyone.

As for cutting your carbon footprint, I guess if you have a standard family car that does something less than say, 45 mpg then it may be worth considering. If I'd been driving my previous car, a Nissan Primera (30 mpg), I'd be saving around 0.6 tonnes a year.

Yeah, buses, worth a look. And the trains? I looked into that too: Almost double the cost of the bus!

Climate Engineering Tests Put On Hold

More commonly known as geoengineering, climate engineering is the 'science' of trying to manipulate the climate to reverse global warming. In an earlier blog, I said that I was against it. And I still am.

One of the many geoengineering ideas put forward is to cool the planet down by injecting sulphates into the stratosphere. It's thought that this would have a similar effect to large volcanic eruptions, which are known to have a temporary cooling effect on the world. You can read more about the theory here.

The reason I mention it is that, until a few days ago, a UK project was about to start testing the feasibility of this so-called stratospheric particle injection. This month they wanted to send a balloon up to a height of 1000 metres with a hose attached to it and spray water into the atmosphere. Sounds a bit basic but that's the appeal of this technique: It's low tech, cheap, and quick.

How about that? All our climate change problems solved for next to nothing. Almost too good to be true.

In fact, the project has been put on hold whilst they "consult stakeholders". Presumably because objections have been raised about the wisdom of the technique.

You see, there are a number of problems with it:

a) It does nothing about the underlying problem of carbon emissions. In fact, once they've started putting sulphates into the stratosphere, interest in cutting CO2 is likely to wither away. Which will mean that we will be forced to continue with sulphates for centuries because, as soon we stop, the climate will start warming again. Cooling the planet only solves one of the problems of CO2. For example, with CO2 still in our atmosphere ocean acidification will continue killing off our seas.

b) Once you put the sulphates up there, you have no control of where they go and what effect they will have. They may cause climatic disruption e.g. They may cause monsoons to fail in Africa and Asia. They could also contribute to ozone depletion. And, exactly how much do you put up there? How much, for example, will lower the average world temperature by 0.5C? The Earth's atmosphere is a complex, dynamic system that we're still struggling to understand, so it'll have to be guesswork. Do you feel comfortable with that?

c) Nobody knows what the long term effects of sulphate injection will be. It may mess with ecosystems, it may have unknown effects on plant-life, on us even. It's just one big experiment.

More here.

Recycling: Bits & Pieces

In this post I'll be writing about why recycling isn't all good news, and the battle between supermarkets and councils.

Recycling - The Downside

My family, like many others, tries to recycle everything possible: glass; cans; foil; paper; card; plastics; batteries; and vegetable waste.

We're all encouraged to do this by government and environmentalists alike. The reason being that it stops the stuff going to landfill, plus it costs less, and uses less energy to reprocess the material back to a useable form.

This is all really good, except that the reprocessing still uses energy anyway, most of which is currently from fossil fuels, and so adding to global carbon emissions. So, whilst it may feel good to be taking all those things down to the recycling centre, it's not as if we've reduced it's carbon footprint down to zero. That's why it's so important for us to remember to 'reduce', and 'reuse' as a priority before we recycle. The less we consume in the first place, the better. More Reduce-Reuse-Recycle here.

Supermarkets vs. Local Authorities

In the UK, like other countries, a common place to find recycling bins, is the local supermarket. This is a clever strategy because most people regularly go to a supermarket, so they can drop off their recycling without having to make a special journey to local dump (The other place you find recycling facilities in Britain).

Until recently, all these recycling areas were run by the local authorities (a.k.a. councils in Britain). This maintains a common, high standard of collection and processing, and provides the councils with a much needed income, as these bins can be run at a profit.

However, the supermarkets are getting wise to this. A few months ago, Tesco started asking councils to remove their recycling bins so that they could install their own and get the cash for themselves. Many councils are furious at this because, in these cash-strapped times, the income from recycling can mean the difference between running a vital service or not. The supermarkets, on the other hand, are highly profitable businesses, it's not as if they need the money: Individual councils get around £50,000 a year from these facilities. That's chicken-feed to Tesco. This could yet blow up in their face if the public decide to shop elsewhere, or the local councils start turning down planning applications for new branches of Tesco. More here.