Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all,
Vanilla are planning an update to the site on April 24th (next Wednesday). It is a major PHP8 update which is expected to boost performance across the site. The site will be down from 7pm and it is expected to take about an hour to complete. We appreciate your patience during the update.
Thanks all.

Did wood pellet systems never catch on?

124»

Comments

  • #92
    wexfordman2
    Registered Users Posts: 2,541 ✭✭✭wexfordman2


    listermint wrote: »
    its not complicated. as per your second parahgraph in winter your solar covers your baseload which means baseload is removed. and you just have the heat pump. So essentially the solar covers some of your load versus none of it at all.

    Of course it covers "some" of your load, I never disputed that! I am disputing the argument that solar pv could in any way provide a meaningfull cost saving towards the running cost of a heatpump.

    I have not

    1) Argued that either system does not make sense on its own merit.
    2) Said that both systems should not work alongside each other.


  • #93
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 21,179 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Depends on how much solar PV you have and provided there is a FIT without the FIT you're giving excess to the grid for free and I will never do this.

    The missus parents in Germany sell all their excess solar to the grid and buy it back for their storage heaters in Winter. It contributes significantly to the energy requirements of their house. But without the FIT, it's useless.

    On a Sunny day in Summer their 14 Kw/p array can generate a bit over 70 Kwh.


  • #94
    air
    Registered Users Posts: 2,822 ✭✭✭air


    Coltrane wrote: »
    .
    My biggest concern with PV is storm damage. With a storm seemingly every few weeks now, I do worry about the lift from them. But I'm no engineer and have seen no examples of them actually lifting off!

    The panels and rails are likely much stronger than any other element of the roof sheathing.
    Furthermore for tiled roofs, the hooks effectively pin the tile (and thus surrounding ones) to the roof, actually improving the situation.
    That said, in a very exposed location in roof mounted panels might well be a better option.


  • #95
    garo
    Registered Users Posts: 1,874 ✭✭✭garo


    Deleted User wrote: »
    Depends on how much solar PV you have and provided there is a FIT without the FIT you're giving excess to the grid for free and I will never do this.

    That sounds very much like cutting off your nose to spite your face. Why wouldn’t you have free electricity if it means you have to give some away? If the payback makes sense you should do it regardless of whether you are giving some of it away for free. The current grant of 3000 is worth 20,000 kWh at a 15c rate. The actual FIT rate is likely to be a lot less. If it is 5c that is 60,000 kWh or about 20 years of FIT.


  • #96
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 21,179 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    garo wrote: »
    That sounds very much like cutting off your nose to spite your face. Why wouldn’t you have free electricity if it means you have to give some away? If the payback makes sense you should do it regardless of whether you are giving some of it away for free. The current grant of 3000 is worth 20,000 kWh at a 15c rate. The actual FIT rate is likely to be a lot less. If it is 5c that is 60,000 kWh or about 20 years of FIT.

    Because I'm not giving free energy to any company who won't pay me for it, they won't give me a Kwh for free so why should I give they hundreds of free Kwh or thousands or MWhrs over years for free?

    I won't be able to use a lot of this energy, without most of it going to the grid in the brighter months so if there was a FIT at least I get paid for a substantial amount more energy than I would otherwise give away for free and I can buy it back when I need it.

    If there is a FIT then I hope the companies pay for it rather than the tax payer subsidise it and give commercial companies free energy.


  • Advertisement
  • #97
    KCross
    Registered Users Posts: 12,070 ✭✭✭✭KCross


    Deleted User wrote: »
    Because I'm not giving free energy to any company who won't pay me for it, they won't give me a Kwh for free so why should I give they hundreds of free Kwh or thousands or MWhrs over years for free?

    You've missed garo's point entirely.... yes you give some away for free but you also reduce the amount you are taking off them at expensive day rate.... if you do the math and it pays for itself it doesnt really matter if you are giving some away for free.... you are cutting off your nose to spite your face if you at least dont run the numbers.

    It's possible it doesnt work for you. e.g. if no one is at home by day to maximise daytime usage.

    If it really irks you to give them free electricity then sink it into a large water store or something.


    And I'm willing to bet that when FiT comes in they will reduce the grant, so waiting around for FiT will be somewhat pointless, imo.


Advertisement