DIYbanter - View Single Post

John Beardmore

In message . com,
writes
John Beardmore wrote:

To be honest, while what you say was true 10 years ago, the difference
in cost per area is now pretty small, and the prices we quote to end
users are much the same per area for FP and ET, because while ET is
slightly more expensive, installation is easier and safer in lifting and
handling terms, if not actually quicker.

Cheers, J/.

I suppose thats true of professional installs on rooftops, I'm thinking
more of diy installs, where the cost for a decent area of tubes is way
above that of flat panels,

But that's my whole point. At least in the UK, the prices are now
pretty similar.

Flat panels can give much better performance at ground level or on a
flat roof, as 1 or 2 reflectors are easily added to give anything from
1-2 suns.

Not sure why the same can't be true of ET systems ?

Equipment on a flat roof ditto, mounting the panel either at
an angle from roof to wall or else flat on the wall, reflector below.

I guess the bug bear with that is getting end users to keep the
reflectors clean, especially if they are flat.

I guess the ultimate is a 3 zone system, with a drain heat exchanger
providing the 1st stage of heat input,

Maybe. My understanding is that the people who have tried these in the
UK have not found them cost effective, and I'm not sure what the
regulatory position is either.

Guess energy prices may have changed the first of those at least !

flat panels the 2nd (with
reflectors for best performance), and vac tubes the last.

Possibly. We've done cylinders / heat stores that go

Oil

Wood

Solar

and have also considered

Oil

Solar

Heat pump

Perhaps one
day the equipment will be cheap enough for this to be the done thing.

Or more likely, energy prices will be high enough to justify it.

Cheers, J/.
--
John Beardmore