Some 'real world' results (Solar PV)

kellys_eye · Post by **kellys_eye** » Thu Jan 31, 2013 11:50 am

I got this information from my BiL who had a system fitted just before the 43p/kWhr FiT amount was withdrawn/reduced......

SYSTEM : 10 off Solar PV panels with total rated output of 2.35kW/hr cost unknown (can anyone give a figure for this?)

The following figures relate to readings taken during 2012

Total annual power output 1226kW/hr (works out at an overall efficiency of 11.6%)

Best output (week) 1st week in May (93kW/hr for the week)
Worst output (week) 1st week Jan (0.6kW/hr for the week)

If he had been paid 'the going rate' for the power produced he would have received £183.90 for the electricity produced.

As it worked out, he was paid £527.18 for the power produced. His electricity bill for 2012 was effectively 'zero'.

Based on an installation fee of (guessing here) £4,000 he will break even in around 10-12 years - taking into account drops off of efficiency, depreciation/iinterest payments and a steady FiT return as already being received but discounting any breakages, servicing or repairs etc.

Only after 10 years (minimum) will he actually see a return on his money - and this is WITH a ridiculous FiTs return........

These are real-world figures.

Still interested in installing a set?

BillyGoat · Post by **BillyGoat** » Thu Jan 31, 2013 11:57 am

Something doesn't sound right there KE.

What inverter has he got, how many strings and what's the peak output that he has ever seen/recorded?

What is the orientation of the panels?

Any shading (aerials, chimneys, trees, etc).

BG

BillyGoat · Post by **BillyGoat** » Thu Jan 31, 2013 1:59 pm

Just to add to this, here is a post on another Navitron about production records:

http://www.navitron.org.uk/forum/index. ... #msg220833

The one I link too is a 1.98kWp PV (11 x Sharp 180 and SB1700) system from his own sig - other productions to reference against. It's almost double your bil's system!

I'm at (a mate owns) a Solar PV company - he says there is something wrong there too!

BG

kellys_eye · Post by **kellys_eye** » Thu Jan 31, 2013 2:52 pm

I'm using the output records he provided - he admits his installation isn't the 'best' but there are no obstructions, his roof has a pitch of (guessing here) 55 degrees and it's facing SE. Mind you, he does live in central Scotland

PS X-axis is week number

Someone-Else · Post by **Someone-Else** » Thu Jan 31, 2013 8:05 pm

Interesting, funny that really, you don't hear any more about solar panels for your roof. It seems to have dies a death last year.

BillyGoat · Post by **BillyGoat** » Thu Jan 31, 2013 8:08 pm

The media has stopped berating it, you mean.

I can assure you there is still interest.....

Someone-Else · Post by **Someone-Else** » Thu Jan 31, 2013 8:24 pm

Yes, I guess that is what I mean. But no leaflets etc about it either.

kellys_eye · Post by **kellys_eye** » Thu Jan 31, 2013 9:30 pm

My bad - his panels are directly south......

AAIK any drop of interest in these panels could be due to the decrease in FiTs that have been brought in along with fears that they will be cut still further.

Personally I still maintain they would be ok if they were fitted for a decent price (not the artificially inflated price as charged by MSC(?) certified companies) BUT without the SUBSIDY they would never show a return - and THAT'S what's wrong with the system - subsidies.

Some 'real world' results (Solar PV)

Some 'real world' results (Solar PV)

Re: Some 'real world' results (Solar PV)

Re: Some 'real world' results (Solar PV)

Re: Some 'real world' results (Solar PV)

Re: Some 'real world' results (Solar PV)

Re: Some 'real world' results (Solar PV)

Re: Some 'real world' results (Solar PV)

Re: Some 'real world' results (Solar PV)