Solar Panels for IPs?!

There is an article in today's The Australian showing how the take up of solar is highest in the bush

Another queenslander argument against day light saving - I'll miss out on an hour of power generation from my panels. together with, the curtains will fade and the cows won't know when to be milked.
 
Whatever you call that part of the city that isn't "mortgage belt" has long been known to reject the idea.

My thoughts are that it suits the mortgage belt best. They typically all leave the house during the day, to work or school, and they can export all they generate. A lot of people in the "old" part of town don't fit that mould. We don't.
 
Another queenslander argument against day light saving - I'll miss out on an hour of power generation from my panels. together with, the curtains will fade and the cows won't know when to be milked.

Did you read the article :confused:. Where did the daylight saving comment come from?
 
My thoughts are that it suits the mortgage belt best. They typically all leave the house during the day, to work or school, and they can export all they generate. A lot of people in the "old" part of town don't fit that mould. We don't.

The article suggests it has more to do with those on limited incomes not being able to pay the 70% increase in electricity costs over the past four years, and the projected 70% increase over the next four years.

It seems they are spending a penny (or several thousand) now to make ongoing savings. It doesn't even mention anything about leaving the house during the day.
 

Hi Sunfish

I recently read an article on a solar project on magnetic island. I've searched but can't find it. As a local I thought you might be able to comment.

From memory the islands power use was increasing and they would need to build some serious infrastructure to get power from the mainland. Instead, homeowners allowed panels to be installed on their roofs with no payment, but no direct benefit. As a result the island didn't need to purchase another extension lead to plug into townsville and the net result was large savings.

I also think the project saw locals using power more wisely.
 
The article suggests it has more to do with those on limited incomes not being able to pay the 70% increase in electricity costs over the past four years, and the projected 70% increase over the next four years.

It seems they are spending a penny (or several thousand) now to make ongoing savings. It doesn't even mention anything about leaving the house during the day.

He's entitled to his opinion.
 
Hi Sunfish

I recently read an article on a solar project on magnetic island. I've searched but can't find it. As a local I thought you might be able to comment.

From memory the islands power use was increasing and they would need to build some serious infrastructure to get power from the mainland. Instead, homeowners allowed panels to be installed on their roofs with no payment, but no direct benefit. As a result the island didn't need to purchase another extension lead to plug into townsville and the net result was large savings.

I also think the project saw locals using power more wisely.
Can't help you Ed. They are in the news because their land-fill is full but I have never heard of the extension cord being overloaded, but it wouldn't surprise me. There are always greens [elected and unelected] around council, but without storage I don't see how it would help them cook dinner.
 
That's okay then :D.

Do read it though... I was surprised by who is buying solar.

I respect your opinion so I read it. But didn't need to, your synopsis was accurate.

I'm at a loss as to why bushies would go solar. Perhaps power supply is irregular in their areas (you'd remember the brown outs in QLD).

The 'poor' are generally early adopters. I think it explains why the working class get solar installed. They're probably more scared by potential power increases than the 'rich'. If power prices tripled overnight I would barely notice, to a family in logan it would be devastating.
 
Hi wylie,

This is the reason why solar hasn't taken off.

Even at a risk free, unleveraged 5% p.a. bank deposit rate, you could have preserved your 12.5K capital and received $ 156 in interest for the 90 days.

Obviously, exposing the same amount of capital to a prudent amount of risk and a sensible leverage would see the returns easily outperform the solar panel returns.

I understand people purchase these for the feel good factor, and that's great, but it certainly doesn't stack up economically to buy solar panels.

Unfortunately, everyone who buys a solar system tries in vain to justify to everyone who will listen that it is a good move from a money perspective. Nothing could be further from the truth.

...and that's in year 1.

In 15 years time when the system is stuffed / rusted / cracked / conks out and your capital has gone and you need to inject further amounts of capital to replace it, that is when the solar industry is really exposed as a greeny feel good thing, and nothing more.

Everyone looks at the lowered opex, and deliberately ignores both the opportunity cost of the capex and the large back end capex required to continue having slightly lower opex charges.

For it to work, supply charges will need to come down dramatically, as well as installation and commissioning costs. With Australian labour components in most of those 3 areas, I won't hold my breath for any major downward movements.....and hence the solar industry will be a dead duck for a good while yet.

For urbanites, yep, I agree. ;)

But, this is not the whole story is it....... what if you are 1.5 km from the nearest power pole & within ~ 1 hr commute to CBD? Would you rather spend over 100k for mains power or 60-70K for a solar RAPS?

Solar has a place, today, just not in suburbia just yet. Not grid interactive that is.....;)
 
Hi nano,


That huge hail storm we had in Perth during March 2010 certainly was a doozy. It smashed an amazing amount of rooves (the Landlord's in Ozzy Park literally had their rooves replaced for free !!).


Not to mention the myriad of cars that were damaged beyond repair.


Surprisingly, I haven't heard anything about the solar panels on the rooves, but I simply cannot imagine them surviving that onslaught.


I'm scheduled to see my insurance salesman in the next month. I'll be asking him the question about how many households made claims....if any.

Yes it was a doozy - caused an amazing amount of damage to cars and roofs. But you need to work on your imagination! From a PV panel point of view, it came in from the north, which is the worst direction for the panels as they all face that way. And yet, the Perth PV industry received pretty much no reports of damage. Perhaps that may be due to this:

Sharp, Kyocera, Sunpower, Conergy and Trina (and others...) solar panels are all rated to the equivalent force of 25mm diameter hail stones at 23m/s. The glass covering on solar power panels is very thick, and also tempered.

These are highly engineered structures (tempered glass is a world away from your average window and lasts just as long) - far more than a tin roof some chippie has slapped up - of course someone has actually thought of these things.

If anyone has actual knowledge of PV panel hail damage from that event in Perth I would love to hear it - not just media reports which were later discovered to be journalists "expecting" damage because the damage to everything else was so bad.

Generally the hail would have to significantly exceed the specs above to damage PV panels. It does happen but didn't seem to happen in that Perth hail storm by all accounts. Perhaps future roof damage from hail events would be more limited if people put PV panels on their roofs to protect them? Not such a bad idea... :rolleyes:
 
If anyone has actual knowledge of PV panel hail damage from that event in Perth I would love to hear it. It does happen but didn't seem to happen in that Perth hail storm by all accounts.

Hi,

As I mentioned previously, I'm meeting with the insurance broker shortly, and shall ask the question !!
 
I'm with AAMI, their building cover includes "any permanently fixed outdoor items, including solar panels".

They did not bump my premiums up on account of solar.
 
Last edited:
I was seriously looking at solar 12 mth ago more to just reduce my quarterly bill. I did not look at "return in cost" or about the "green factor" was just to reduce my bill.

In the end I have not gone solar I just looked at how we were using power and have changed a few things.

Appliances we don't use much of - turned off.
Son moved out
Stop wife using dryer all the time, hang cloths out if the suns out :rolleyes: I never understood using dryer when the sun is out became habit I guess.

My last bill was reduced by $125.00. I will be interested in my next couple of bills as the only thing that will be on is a light, fridge, pool pump and pressure pump for auto sprinkler system everything else will be OFF. Have been transfered to Roma Qld to mid to late next year.

Unless our habits change no point in solar as I see it and I cannot justify the outlay for any preceived reduced power bill.

As for the question asked initially would tenants pay more for solar - Depends on where you are but I am saying NO and my IP NO.

Brian
 
Back
Top