Speak EV - Electric Car Forums banner

1 - 15 of 15 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
195 Posts
It's a bad idea.

A good idea would be to petition for far greater insulation and airtightness standards.

Builders are currently using a few panels on the roof as a means of reducing the insulation requirements.

No point pouring more energy into a property if it's going to leak out.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
482 Posts
given that without FIT the economics currently don’t stack up, who’s going to pay for these compulsory panels?

And what about the locations where solar is just not suitable?
Didn't they say that about insulation? The cry was - "No one will want to pay the extra" (even if it does save money over time.) There was a big up roar by all then. But would you buy a house with no insulation now?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,046 Posts
Reducing individual homeowners' bills is nice, but isn't there a bigger picture?
What about the potential to relieve demand on the National Grid? Build less power stations?

What about, I don't know, new build homes that are not houses..?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
443 Posts
It's a bad idea.

A good idea would be to petition for far greater insulation and airtightness standards.

Builders are currently using a few panels on the roof as a means of reducing the insulation requirements.

No point pouring more energy into a property if it's going to leak out.
Unless it becomes mandatory to test every single new build dwelling for air tightness (and force remedial measures to be carried out ensuring it passes before it is issued a completion certificate) then airtightness standards are meaningless - a typical volume housebuilder will never manage to build to the standards required even if their drawings show that the build design/construction may allow for the levels required. When insulation standards are so easily compromised by poor/sloppy installation that are impossible to inspect easily (unless you use thermal imaging equipment in cold weather), then moves to impose tighter standards will achieve very little.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
195 Posts
....a typical volume housebuilder will never manage to build to the standards required even if their drawings show that the build design/construction may allow for the levels required.
You are right, the build quality of even the most basic of dwellings leaves much to be desired, but that's a separate issue.

My comment relates to new build SAP ratings and how developers are able to use PV installation as a cost saving measure, basically, a tiny amount of PV installed equals a reduction in the insulation levels required to acheive the minimun rating.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
478 Posts
Discussion Starter #9
My comment relates to new build SAP ratings and how developers are able to use PV installation as a cost saving measure, basically, a tiny amount of PV installed equals a reduction in the insulation levels required to acheive the minimun rating.
Not querying your comment (and I'm no expert!) but it seems that would make no economic sense for the housebuilder - surely a slight reduction in, say loft insulation and cavity insulation, wouldn't save much money when set against the cost of a few panels, inverter, cabling etc.

And, yes, not all properties will be suitable for PV but it annoys me that so many new-build houses that would gain considerably from PV, face the right direction etc don't have it as a matter of course. Surely volume builders can negotiate good prices for buying panels, inverters etc in bulk and even if there's no FIT, the buyer will benefit from reduced dependence on the grid - and the grid benefits from not having to supply it in the first place...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
482 Posts
Lets do it step by step. All new Commercial builds to have Solar panels and planing department to refuse designs that do not make best use of the roof direction for Solar.
 

·
Short term PHEV
Joined
·
561 Posts
I'm sure there would be some economies of scale just from going to commercial size over using residential properties but wouldn't it be even more cost efficient to just have concentrated solar farms rather than panels dotted around 30ft above ground on top of individual buildings? Finding the right location in the uk will always be a problem but the cost per Kwh must be a fraction of a home/commercial building setup?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,792 Posts
given that without FIT the economics currently don’t stack up, who’s going to pay for these compulsory panels?
Barclays were testing a solar panel mortgage. Basically it acknowledged as you energy bills were lower your payments could bge higher thus you could borrow more.

It seems a win win for the mortgage companies.
Risk same.
Loan amount increased.
Profit increased.
Customer happier.
Customer same or better off.
 

·
Short term PHEV
Joined
·
561 Posts
If the economics don’t stack up in the first place on a cash investment basis sticking it thru a Barclays mortgage is not going to help.

So the customer would end up with a bigger mortgage and higher repayments that overshadow the energy savings, can’t say I’d be happy with that.

Customer walks away to a standard mortgage product.
Customer no worse off.
 
1 - 15 of 15 Posts
Top