On 04-Oct-22 9:57, Mike McMillan wrote:
> Vicky <vicky.ayech@gmail.com> wrote:

>> Isn't there the cosideration of how much it costs the environment to
>> mine the stuff needed for the panels and manufacture them and
>> transport them?
>>
>
> Yes, there is, but…. I am told that that cost is outweighed in the first
> few years and as panels should last 25+ years and the battery systems
> should last between 10 - 20 years, looks like the environment will benefit
> overall. I haven’t done the calculations so am trusting to what
> knowledgable others have stated.

I wonder if those sort of claims can be twinned with the quoted MPG
figure for our car?
What is claimed, and what we actually get, are...
quite distantly related.

--
Sam Plusnet

On 04-Oct-22 14:31, Chris J Dixon wrote:
> Mike McMillan wrote:
>
>> I’m hoping to see 25 years of service from my solar energy and air source
>> heating projects, if I’m not around (nor Mrs. McToodles) then it will be
>> for the benefit of Wunderkind & Family. I had savings that have been used
>> to finance the whole lot so from Day 1, I’m regarding it as an ethical
>> decision that reduces my energy bills at the same time.
>
> If I am honest, whilst I am interested in matters technical, and
> of pale Green persuasion, the possible financial benefit was the
> main driver behind the installation of my PV panels.
>
> At the time I said to myself, if I am still around to see them in
> profit, great, if not, I am hardly likely to be troubled.
>
> As things have turned out, the 2010 installation cost was paid
> back by 2018, and my current "capital gain" is about 60% of the
> amount invested, neglecting inflation.
>
> As regards drop in performance, my annual output is as tabulated,
> for 2011 onwards, so I don't think there is much problem.
>
> kWh
> 3297 (2011)
> 3510
> 3585
> 3688
> 3697
> 3595
> 3460
> 3763
> 3765
> 3800
> 3553
> 3362 (2022 to date}

Thanks for that Chris.
That is a decent yardstick.

--
Sam Plusnet

On 04/10/2022 13:57, John Ashby wrote:
> Which reminds me, has anyone seen JPG recently?

Yes, I've seen him on Twitter and he's liked a post or two of mine in
the past few days.

--
Best wishes, Serena
The older you get, the tougher it is to lose weight because by then,
your body and your fat are really good friends (anon)

On 04/10/2022 09:57, Mike McMillan wrote:
> Vicky <vicky.ayech@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Isn't there the cosideration of how much it costs the environment to
>> mine the stuff needed for the panels and manufacture them and
>> transport them?
>>
> Yes, there is, but…. I am told that that cost is outweighed in the first
> few years and as panels should last 25+ years and the battery systems
> should last between 10 - 20 years, looks like the environment will benefit
> overall. I haven’t done the calculations so am trusting to what
> knowledgable others have stated.
>

You should not trust anyone on this, they've all got something to sell
you [1]. The environmental impact from mining for the rare elements
needed especially for batteries is enormous. Not to mention the child
and slave labour that is used in African mines and the slave labour in
China used in assembly.

There was a Volvo study on EVs that concluded that you would need to
drive 60,000 miles before the environmental impact of manufacture was
matched by the environmental savings from "clean" [2] driving. That's
about 10 years of driving which is just when the battery needs changing :/

[1] e.g. Drax who are powering their "green" biomass plant with pellets
from Primary forest in Canada and then shipping it across the Atlantic.
More CO2 intensive than burning coal. Don't take my word for it, watch
Panorama.

[2] Clean at the point of driving, but there were still CO2 emissions to
produce the electricity. I'm all for being environmentally aware, but we
shouldn't kid ourselves. Apart from the minor problem of where all the
electricity is going to come from to power these cars, and the
availability of working charging points, this is why I will not be
getting an EV. I expect my current 4yo diesel will see me out, at least
until we stop driving, and that is far more green than buying something new.

On 04/10/2022 14:31, Chris J Dixon wrote:
> Mike McMillan wrote:
>
>> I’m hoping to see 25 years of service from my solar energy and air source
>> heating projects, if I’m not around (nor Mrs. McToodles) then it will be
>> for the benefit of Wunderkind & Family. I had savings that have been used
>> to finance the whole lot so from Day 1, I’m regarding it as an ethical
>> decision that reduces my energy bills at the same time.
>
> If I am honest, whilst I am interested in matters technical, and
> of pale Green persuasion, the possible financial benefit was the
> main driver behind the installation of my PV panels.

<LW>
>
> At the time I said to myself, if I am still around to see them in
> profit, great, if not, I am hardly likely to be troubled.

<&ALW>
>
> As things have turned out, the 2010 installation cost was paid
> back by 2018, and my current "capital gain" is about 60% of the
> amount invested, neglecting inflation.

I reckon we have paid off about half of our solar panel investment in
under 4 years what with FIT payments, reducing our bill by using
appliances when sun is shining and reducing gas bill a bit in winter by
using excess generation in a space heater.

With current prices the rest will be paid off more quickly, but I would
have been happy with the 10 year ROI I originally estimated.

There's also the increase in the value of the house and the improvement
in our EPC (we were D but close to C, so panels will put us in that
bracket. Not of much interest to us as we are not planning to move
again, but should be considered when assessing value of these
installations. We had the money spare after the sale of our Italian
house and nowhere to put it that would have paid much interest, so a
good investment.
>
Agreed. I have monitored the individual panels at peak production both
just after installation and more recently and can't see any change. Our
panels have never been cleaned except by rain showers.

I have added my annual production to your table:
>
> kWh
> 3765 4429 (panels turned on Feb 12th)
> 3800 4836
> 3553 4372
> 3362 4284 (2022 to date}

BrritSki <rtilburyTAKEAWAY@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 04/10/2022 09:57, Mike McMillan wrote:
>> Vicky <vicky.ayech@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Isn't there the cosideration of how much it costs the environment to
>>> mine the stuff needed for the panels and manufacture them and
>>> transport them?
>>>
>> Yes, there is, but…. I am told that that cost is outweighed in the first
>> few years and as panels should last 25+ years and the battery systems
>> should last between 10 - 20 years, looks like the environment will benefit
>> overall. I haven’t done the calculations so am trusting to what
>> knowledgable others have stated.
>>
>
> You should not trust anyone on this, they've all got something to sell
> you [1]. The environmental impact from mining for the rare elements
> needed especially for batteries is enormous. Not to mention the child
> and slave labour that is used in African mines and the slave labour in
> China used in assembly.

There are some people throughout the globe who take advantage of others and
I would not defend them in any way.
>
> There was a Volvo study on EVs that concluded that you would need to
> drive 60,000 miles before the environmental impact of manufacture was
> matched by the environmental savings from "clean" [2] driving. That's
> about 10 years of driving which is just when the battery needs changing :/
>
Do Volvo produce EV’s themselves?

I have been told that average mileage was approx. 10,000 miles per year
some years ago - has this gone down to approx. 6.000 miles per annum now?

> [1] e.g. Drax who are powering their "green" biomass plant with pellets
> from Primary forest in Canada and then shipping it across the Atlantic.
> More CO2 intensive than burning coal. Don't take my word for it, watch
> Panorama.
> Have recorded (I hope!) this but not watched it yet. Would I trust Drax’s
> PR? What do you think!?

> [2] Clean at the point of driving, but there were still CO2 emissions to
> produce the electricity. I'm all for being environmentally aware, but we
> shouldn't kid ourselves. Apart from the minor problem of where all the
> electricity is going to come from to power these cars, and the
> availability of working charging points, this is why I will not be
> getting an EV. I expect my current 4yo diesel will see me out, at least
> until we stop driving, and that is far more green than buying something new.
>
>
Perhaps the whole matter could be investigated by ‘More or Less’ (R4)?
>
Of course, I have no use for an EV as I am unable to drive at all but, I
will be producing the majority of the power I need to run our domestic
electrical appliances including heating; as you have pointed out, seasonal
output is in inverse order with demand. I will be selling back excess
during at least six months of the year to subsidise the cold weather
month’s needs. Incidentally, with the present crazy pricing of energy,
Octopus Energy offer more pennies for me to export per kW/h than I pay to
use it at times! Once I have energy storage, I’ll also be able to avail
myself of the cheap rate hours to charge the battery and use that energy at
peak times.

--
Toodle Pip, Mike McMillan

Vicky <vicky.ayech@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, 04 Oct 2022 11:17:47 +0100, Vicky <vicky.ayech@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> On 4 Oct 2022 08:25:20 GMT, Sally Thompson
>> <thompson.stonybrook@gmail.com.invalid> wrote:
>>
>>> Linda Fox <linda.ff@ntlworld.com> wrote:
>>>> BrritSki <rtilburyTAKEAWAY@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> On 30/09/2022 10:07, Sally Thompson wrote:
>>>>>> BrritSki <rtilburyTAKEAWAY@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> On 29/09/2022 14:37, Sally Thompson wrote:
>>>>>>>> ... Some interesting relevant groups there which I'm
>>>>>>>> a member of, eg Solar and Battery UK. Our solar system is due to be
>>>>>>>> installed at the end of October, so I've been doing quite a bit of
>>>>>>>> research.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Thanks for the link Sally. I have requested to join and will post my
>>>>>>> analysis there too for comment as I keep thinking I have forgotten
>>>>>>> something as everyone seems to be installing much bigger systems.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> What system have you decided to go with in terms of panels and battery
>>>>>>> size ?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 12 390W panels but we are delaying battery on grounds of cost. We are told
>>>>>> we can add that on later, and since it's on the DC side it won't incur VAT.
>>>>>> We trust the company; they are fairly local, have been in the business for
>>>>>> many years, and installed our ASHP some years ago.
>>>>>>
>>>>> Sounds good. We are very pleased with our similar size system (a couple
>>>>> more panels but they're older and less efficient).
>>>>>
>>>>> Good luck with the installation.
>>>>
>>>> I couldn’t tell you how big my batteries are, but over the past six or
>>>> seven years we spent thousands and thousands and thousands of pounds to get
>>>> cheap energy. Fourteen solar panels, a Hitachi air-to-air heat pump, a
>>>> Little Magic Thermodynamic Box which is a PV water heater, and three pairs
>>>> of batteries. We had the gas meter taken out as we were paying quite a big
>>>> standing charge for nothing at all. This summer it was glorious: I was with
>>>> d#1 In Weymouth when Cambridge was getting 40 degrees, so my roof was
>>>> earning money and only my fridge freezer was consuming any power. The
>>>> monitor on my phone in the daytime still mostly shows my leccy coming from
>>>> the roof or the batteries, which charge overnight now I'm on Economy 7.
>>>>
>>>> But the conundrum is: is my energy actually cheaper, when you consider how
>>>> much we've paid to get it? Including of course all the silly interest on
>>>> all the loans we took out, which were eventually paid off by Robin's mother
>>>> kindly leaving us enough to do so when she passed away. When do you stop
>>>> balancing the benefit you get against the cost of getting to that point? I
>>>> suppose it's rather like having a well-paid job but having spent a fortune
>>>> training for it. Is this one of those questions that would get different
>>>> answers from an economist, an accountant, a mathematician, a philosopher
>>>> and a bank manager?
>>>>
>>>
>>> Our feeling is that we are doing it for environmental reasons rather than
>>> payback. I had saved quite a bit to pay for it, so no loans needed. The
>>> way I look at it is like a holiday. It makes you feel good, you benefit
>>> from it, but nobody expects payback from it.
>>
>> I think you live in a more rural and so cleaner area than we dl: in
>> the middle of 3 motorways. Do you find dust settles onthe pannels
>
> OOps, went to spellcheck pannels and the post got away from me.
> We find dust settles on the roof of the car, for instance. Presumably
> it settles on the roof too. We didn't get the pannels as the roof is
> not a big enough area to make it worth while compared to outlay, but
> when we considered it a few years ago we didn't think of dust, which
> would reduce the benefit, presumably?
>

You got a sticky ‘N’ key, Vicky?

Sincerely Chris

On 05/10/2022 10:31, Mike McMillan wrote:
> BrritSki <rtilburyTAKEAWAY@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On 04/10/2022 09:57, Mike McMillan wrote:
>>> Vicky <vicky.ayech@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>> There was a Volvo study on EVs that concluded that you would need to
>> drive 60,000 miles before the environmental impact of manufacture was
>> matched by the environmental savings from "clean" [2] driving. That's
>> about 10 years of driving which is just when the battery needs changing :/
>>
> Do Volvo produce EV’s themselves?

They do indeed and iirc plan to switch entirely to EVs, which is why the
study was so interesting.
>
> I have been told that average mileage was approx. 10,000 miles per year
> some years ago - has this gone down to approx. 6.000 miles per annum now?

Yes, 10kpa was the standard but I believe that average has gone down now
and is harder to do in most pure EVs anyway.

> Of course, I have no use for an EV as I am unable to drive at all but, I
> will be producing the majority of the power I need to run our domestic
> electrical appliances including heating; as you have pointed out, seasonal
> output is in inverse order with demand. I will be selling back excess
> during at least six months of the year to subsidise the cold weather
> month’s needs. Incidentally, with the present crazy pricing of energy,
> Octopus Energy offer more pennies for me to export per kW/h than I pay to
> use it at times! Once I have energy storage, I’ll also be able to avail
> myself of the cheap rate hours to charge the battery and use that energy at
> peak times.
>
I hope it works out for you, but I have my doubts that any scheme that
lets ordinary oiks like us make money easily will soon be discontinued...

BrritSki <rtilburyTAKEAWAY@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 05/10/2022 10:31, Mike McMillan wrote:
>> BrritSki <rtilburyTAKEAWAY@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On 04/10/2022 09:57, Mike McMillan wrote:
>>>> Vicky <vicky.ayech@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>> There was a Volvo study on EVs that concluded that you would need to
>>> drive 60,000 miles before the environmental impact of manufacture was
>>> matched by the environmental savings from "clean" [2] driving. That's
>>> about 10 years of driving which is just when the battery needs changing :/
>>>
>> Do Volvo produce EV’s themselves?
>
> They do indeed and iirc plan to switch entirely to EVs, which is why the
> study was so interesting.
>>
>> I have been told that average mileage was approx. 10,000 miles per year
>> some years ago - has this gone down to approx. 6.000 miles per annum now?
>
> Yes, 10kpa was the standard but I believe that average has gone down now
> and is harder to do in most pure EVs anyway.
>
>> Of course, I have no use for an EV as I am unable to drive at all but, I
>> will be producing the majority of the power I need to run our domestic
>> electrical appliances including heating; as you have pointed out, seasonal
>> output is in inverse order with demand. I will be selling back excess
>> during at least six months of the year to subsidise the cold weather
>> month’s needs. Incidentally, with the present crazy pricing of energy,
>> Octopus Energy offer more pennies for me to export per kW/h than I pay to
>> use it at times! Once I have energy storage, I’ll also be able to avail
>> myself of the cheap rate hours to charge the battery and use that energy at
>> peak times.
>>
> I hope it works out for you, but I have my doubts that any scheme that
> lets ordinary oiks like us make money easily will soon be discontinued...
>
>
>
>

I don’t expect to ‘make money’, I’m quite sure that over a year, I will
still end up paying some funds for my energy needs - but not as much as I
might have done without solar PV, and the emissions will have been higher
too.

--
Toodle Pip, Mike McMillan

On Wed, 5 Oct 2022 09:07:32 +0100, BrritSki
<rtilburyTAKEAWAY@gmail.com> wrote:

>On 04/10/2022 09:57, Mike McMillan wrote:
>> Vicky <vicky.ayech@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Isn't there the cosideration of how much it costs the environment to
>>> mine the stuff needed for the panels and manufacture them and
>>> transport them?
>>>
>> Yes, there is, but…. I am told that that cost is outweighed in the first
>> few years and as panels should last 25+ years and the battery systems
>> should last between 10 - 20 years, looks like the environment will benefit
>> overall. I haven’t done the calculations so am trusting to what
>> knowledgable others have stated.
>>
>
>You should not trust anyone on this, they've all got something to sell
>you [1]. The environmental impact from mining for the rare elements
>needed especially for batteries is enormous. Not to mention the child
>and slave labour that is used in African mines and the slave labour in
>China used in assembly.
>
>There was a Volvo study on EVs that concluded that you would need to
>drive 60,000 miles before the environmental impact of manufacture was
>matched by the environmental savings from "clean" [2] driving. That's
>about 10 years of driving which is just when the battery needs changing :/
>
>[1] e.g. Drax who are powering their "green" biomass plant with pellets
>from Primary forest in Canada and then shipping it across the Atlantic.
>More CO2 intensive than burning coal. Don't take my word for it, watch
>Panorama.
>
>[2] Clean at the point of driving, but there were still CO2 emissions to
>produce the electricity. I'm all for being environmentally aware, but we
>shouldn't kid ourselves. Apart from the minor problem of where all the
>electricity is going to come from to power these cars, and the
>availability of working charging points, this is why I will not be
>getting an EV. I expect my current 4yo diesel will see me out, at least
>until we stop driving, and that is far more green than buying something new.
>
Yes. These are all important considerations. When I stopped driving in
the year 2000, my Volvo was over 30 years old and insured as a classic
car. It only did 20mpg on a good day but at the time I calculated that
it was more environmentally friendly to carry on using it - having
amortised the environmental damage of its construction over more than
30 years - than to add to pollution by scrapping it and add even more
by having a new car built in my name.

I'm not all that convinced by the environmental awareness of motor
manufacturers either and wonder if the closest they get to being green
is in the colour they might spray their products. IIRC before EVs,
European standards mandated higher efficiency ratings for car engines
which was, I think, intended to reduce fuel consumption. So what did
the manufacturers do? Create fancy, artisitic body shells which
appeared to me to create more wind resistance and to include
air-conditioning and other add-ons which put more load on the engine
leaving fuel consumption figures more or less as they were before.

And talking of add-ons, I'm not very impressed with the latest trend
towards subscription services. Cars (originally high-end but clearly
expanding into the general market) with all the optional extras
already built in and requiring a monthly subscription to unlock the
features you choose to use. I don't like the trend in music, reading
and computing where you never actually own the things you buy and the
true owner may change their mind and withdraw items from you on a
whim. And now you don't really own your own car. Apart from the
subscription services, the manufacturers also appear to have the
ability to brick the product if they don't like the way you use it and
maintain it. And back to the environment: I wonder what the cost to
the planet is of stuffing all the optional extras into every car and
then eventually scrapping much of them unused?

Nick

BrritSki <rtilburyTAKEAWAY@gmail.com> wrote:
..
>
> There's also the increase in the value of the house and the improvement
> in our EPC (we were D but close to C, so panels will put us in that
> bracket. Not of much interest to us as we are not planning to move
> again, but should be considered when assessing value of these
> installations. We had the money spare after the sale of our Italian
> house and nowhere to put it that would have paid much interest, so a
> good investment.

Again, to save energy, we have reviewed our insulation and Wokingham BC
have increased the insulation in our loft and we had an EPC assessment
carried out subsequently, we are now a ‘C’ (72), since then, we have fitted
the solar powering equipment and there is the ASHP to further improve the
figures but the assessor stated that we would be a ‘B’ (83) if solar water
heating was fitted. No mention was made of ASHP or the nature of the solar
water heating method; I think that presently, we may be a ‘B’. I have heard
that hen’s teeth are more freely available then ‘A’ ratings though. We
aren’t planning to move either!

--
Toodle Pip, Mike McMillan

Serena Blanchflower <nospam@blanchflower.me.uk> wrote:
> On 04/10/2022 13:57, John Ashby wrote:
>> Which reminds me, has anyone seen JPG recently?
>
> Yes, I've seen him on Twitter and he's liked a post or two of mine in
> the past few days.
>

I’ve emailed him.

Mrs McT

Mike McMillan <toodle.pip1@virginmedia.com> wrote:
> BrritSki <rtilburyTAKEAWAY@gmail.com> wrote:
> .
>>
>> There's also the increase in the value of the house and the improvement
>> in our EPC (we were D but close to C, so panels will put us in that
>> bracket. Not of much interest to us as we are not planning to move
>> again, but should be considered when assessing value of these
>> installations. We had the money spare after the sale of our Italian
>> house and nowhere to put it that would have paid much interest, so a
>> good investment.
>
> Again, to save energy, we have reviewed our insulation and Wokingham BC
> have increased the insulation in our loft and we had an EPC assessment
> carried out subsequently, we are now a ‘C’ (72), since then, we have fitted
> the solar powering equipment and there is the ASHP to further improve the
> figures but the assessor stated that we would be a ‘B’ (83) if solar water
> heating was fitted. No mention was made of ASHP or the nature of the solar
> water heating method; I think that presently, we may be a ‘B’. I have heard
> that hen’s teeth are more freely available then ‘A’ ratings though. We
> aren’t planning to move either!
>
>
>

The chap did say “A” was the new builds though. (Should hope so, if
constructed as they should be)

Sincerely Chris