Solar Payback Reasonably Profitable, Even in the UK
by Sami Grover, Carrboro, NC, USA on 04.21.08
Last year Guardian columnist Ashley Seager crunched some numbers on whether solar was a good investment for his London home, and after including government subsidies he concluded that an installation would be more profitable than putting his money in the bank. But how have his calculations worked out one year on? The payback is looking pretty good it seems, if his latest update is anything to go by:
“Not only will we not pay for any electricity, we should get a rebate of about £50 once a payment from the so-called renewables obligation (RO) scheme, which rewards microgeneration schemes with cash, is included. In all, the saving for the past year will be around £500, giving a return on our investment of 6%, which is not subject to tax. Next year, when the payments from the RO scheme will double for photovoltaic (PV) solar installations, we will get about £150 back, giving a total return of 7%. That will rise further if energy prices continue to climb - which is likely after oil prices hit yet another high this week.”
Seager does point out that he received 50% grant funding, which the government has since cut due to its popularity (?!), causing demand to collapse to the point that the company that carried out his installation went out of business. However, even without the grant funding, a house installing solar panels now could still enjoy a return of between 3 and 4% tax-free, meaning solar can still be competitive with regular savings – and this doesn’t take into account the possibility of further sharp rises in the cost of energy. For those wanting to learn more about greening their energy supply, our guides on How to Green Your Electricity and How to Green Your Heating are a good place to start.
::The Guardian::via site visit::
Thank you for the timely info. Yesterday, I was having a discussion whether solar is economically viable for households in the UK...
I think that citing a house in the SE of England as an example for how solar panels are cost effective in the UK is a bit disingenuous. However, it's good to know it just about works out there.
That's truly a nice prove of sanity of such environmental investment. Positive numbers are the best possible promotion of these new technologies. Solar power is endless and totally free of charge and it makes us truly energy independent.
Government should make a direct deal with the most competitive solar photovoltaic producers to get prices even much lower through the size of its order (large scale) and other possible financial benefits. 1 $billion or even $10 (5£ billion) or $50b is just a little number for UK government? (they spent only £50m=$100million for this activity with a great headache in their lines)
However, the same government, is obviously insane in this matter. They cut off the program of replacing old dirty energy sources with renewable.
Maybe, the huge success of solar power would have endanger new program of building a series of new Nuclear power plants.
PM Gordon Brown is the first responsible name for this disaster. Britain's taxpayers are going to pay more than $150 billion for clearing up old nuclear waste from old nuclear power plants in following years and the PM has already approved new nuclear program, before the old rubbish has been hidden somewhere deep for next 100.000 years. And nobody knows, how much is going to be the cost of new nuclear power plants and the clearing up their new deadly dangerous highly radioactive material?
good job