The Day of the Electric car is nigh

[[XAP]Bob]

It's sad that this is only headline reaction politics. Only 30% of the smog is caused by vehicles, no mention of those awful inefficient woodburners, industrial emissions etc? Typical politicians!

Al

supposedly the carbon produced is equal to the carbon removed by trees....supposedly. IE woodburners are carbon neutral.
I suspect in London and other big cities the majority of smog is caused by cars.

Where else is the carbon coming from?

[Dawesboi]

Just on the point of hydro/tidal/wave power, and why it isn't used to a greater extent.

The existing hydro schemes were pretty contraversial when built- whole glens flooded and people displaced. You can still see the chimneys from one of the houses in Loch Cluanie, which is a bit creepy. Further, all of the best sites have been developed already, and with development becoming harder, there are diminishing returns on large dammed hydro schemes. There remains a lot of scope for mini or micro hydro, but it had be hard to prove a business case for these projects now that FiT has been reduced so much.

Generating power from the sea is tough. Having machines that are constantly immersed in a high energy corrosive environment is really difficult, and the engineering that has to go into them means that they are very, very expensive. Mechanical breakages and marine fouling are huge problems. Contrast this with wind, where everything is nice and dry and easy to access- it's no wonder there has more success with wind and solar which operate in far more benign environments, and are far less site specific.

[pete75]

We've been here before!

Out if interest, is Pete75's cost return inclusive of his electric bill or just the cost of the installation?
That is, has he just covered the cost of installation within 5 years?
His annual consumption is another factor in the sum.
I am not trying to get at Pete here, but to subsidize individuals in this way seems counterproductive to achieving an (sustainable) electric supply at reasonable cost to everybody.

It's paid for the panels. The ongoing subsidy will pay most of our annual energy costs - electricity and oil.

BTW the high subsidy paid on electricity produced by panels installed before March 2012 wasn't exclusive. It was available to everybody who bothered to install the panels.They were not that expensive and provide a better rate of return than leaving the dosh in the bank. Whether or not it was the best way to encourage renewable energy production doesn't much matter now the subsidy has been reduced to next to nothing.

[Boyd]

It's sad that this is only headline reaction politics. Only 30% of the smog is caused by vehicles, no mention of those awful inefficient woodburners, industrial emissions etc? Typical politicians!

Al

supposedly the carbon produced is equal to the carbon removed by trees....supposedly. IE woodburners are carbon neutral.
I suspect in London and other big cities the majority of smog is caused by cars.

Where else is the carbon coming from?

Is that a serious question?

[Boyd]

BTW the high subsidy paid on electricity produced by panels installed before March 2012 wasn't exclusive. It was available to everybody who bothered to install the panels.They were not that expensive and provide a better rate of return than leaving the dosh in the bank. Whether or not it was the best way to encourage renewable energy production doesn't much matter now the subsidy has been reduced to next to nothing.

It was not available to everyone it was only available to those who could afford it. Not everyone had dosh in the bank.

[pete75]

Generating power from the sea is tough. Having machines that are constantly immersed in a high energy corrosive environment is really difficult, and the engineering that has to go into them means that they are very, very expensive. Mechanical breakages and marine fouling are huge problems. Contrast this with wind, where everything is nice and dry and easy to access- it's no wonder there has more success with wind and solar which operate in far more benign environments, and are far less site specific.

Nah we've had machines constantly immersed in a corrosive marine environment operating reliably for many years. They're called ships. Using the materials used for ship propellers along with the bearing sealing methods used on their shafts ought to prove reliable for the water immersed generating blades, vanes or whatever they're called.

[PDQ Mobile]

Not that I want a wrangle over it but it is still being paid, so the non-solar user is still bearing the (considerable) cost. (British Gas price hike only yest)

What's still being paid? The initial promise? Of course. It was a promise to encourage folk to spend sometimes upwards of £20k as early adopters. Government can't back down on promises because it would get sued and still have to pay out.

Or perhaps you mean new installs - in which case I think you'll find 51p is long gone. These days solar needs to stand on it's own.

I meant old installs.
The Govt has backed out of other things FWIW!!!

I am pro solar and pro sustainable energy but subsidy at this level is too high. All in IMHO.

[kwackers]

I am pro solar and pro sustainable energy but subsidy at this level is too high. All in IMHO.

*Was* too high iyo.

It no longer "is" so I'm guessing your objections are now consigned to history?

[PDQ Mobile]

No because they are still being paid at that level.
The money could be better invested in new sustainable capacity .IMHO.

[kwackers]

No because they are still being paid at that level.
The money could be better invested in new sistainable capacity .IMHO.

Except it can't. The government rightly or wrongly agreed the original payments. This represents a contract they can't legally get out of.

My advice; get over it.

In real terms it really isn't that much money. £20bn for Hinkley Point, £15bn for crossrail, £56bn for HS2, £60bn to leave the EU etc etc.
It's peanuts and rather than going to foreign companies at least it's going to ordinary folk.

[PDQ Mobile]

Nothing to get over.
My bill is too small

I agree about those other costs, crazy!
But what are the solar subsidy costs and for how much electric? for you do not say.

[kwackers]

But what are the solar subsidy costs and for how much electric? for you do not say.

As far as I can tell you currently get 4.07p per KWh for generated electricity (domestic installation).
To get that your home needs to have a decent energy rating or you could get as little as 0.43p.

If you bother with an export meter you get another 4.85p for every unit fed back to the grid (which is then sold for 15p or so to your neighbour).

Don't think that you'll reap in the rewards with a solar farm either. You'll still get 4.85p for every unit sold to the grid but the FIT can be as low as 0.29p.


Better tariffs are available if you go for wind or hydro...

<edit> looking back it would seem to get 44p FIT you'd need to have installed and registered your panels before March 2012.

[Dawesboi]

Generating power from the sea is tough. Having machines that are constantly immersed in a high energy corrosive environment is really difficult, and the engineering that has to go into them means that they are very, very expensive. Mechanical breakages and marine fouling are huge problems. Contrast this with wind, where everything is nice and dry and easy to access- it's no wonder there has more success with wind and solar which operate in far more benign environments, and are far less site specific.

Nah we've had machines constantly immersed in a corrosive marine environment operating reliably for many years. They're called ships. Using the materials used for ship propellers along with the bearing sealing methods used on their shafts ought to prove reliable for the water immersed generating blades, vanes or whatever they're called.

Ships' propellers are made of phosphor bronze and that stuff ain't cheap. Sealing the shaft isn't difficult, although all seals need routine maintenance which is a bit expensive when the machine is on the seabed in a high tidal flow area. Commercial divers cost around £1000/hr, I am told.*
Anyway, no ship stays at sea continually for its whole life. Most of them are drydocked annually for antifouling, replacement of anodes, and other maintenance.

* a couple of years ago, a small ship called the Cemfjord sank with all hands in the Pentland Firth, which is one of the places that tidal turbines are being tried out. Even though she is in less than 100m of water, the bodies were never recovered. It's a dangerous and expensive environment to operate in.

[irc]

[
And I can buy, today, power at 17p per kwh to run them. Day or night rain or shine.

Have you ever checked for cheaper supplies. I'm paying 8.49p + VAT per KWh with a British Gas plan? Standing charge 20.7p +VAT per day

[PDQ Mobile]

But what are the solar subsidy costs and for how much electric? for you do not say.

As far as I can tell you currently get 4.07p per KWh for generated electricity (domestic installation).
To get that your home needs to have a decent energy rating or you could get as little as 0.43p.

If you bother with an export meter you get another 4.85p for every unit fed back to the grid (which is then sold for 15p or so to your neighbour).

Don't think that you'll reap in the rewards with a solar farm either. You'll still get 4.85p for every unit sold to the grid but the FIT can be as low as 0.29p.


Better tariffs are available if you go for wind or hydro...

<edit> looking back it would seem to get 44p FIT you'd need to have installed and registered your panels before March 2012.

But I meant total cost so one could compare to Hinkley, High speed rail, etc