On Jun 14, 12:14*pm, "Man at B&Q" wrote:
On Jun 13, 9:50*am, Rob wrote:

On 13-06-2011 09:15, Jim K wrote: arsehole relative is forging ahead and crowing abt it all in usual
manner- anyone care to give me a *succinct indefensible argument to
hopefully reinforce what a prick he is?

Cheers
Jim K

Because they are typically about 19% efficent. There are developments in
progress which will greatly increase the efficency thus making them
economically viable. They will also get cheaper. I'd wait about 5 years
and then get some. Whilst waiting get a solar thermal system installed.

Only getting the cost down due to economy of scale, and rising prices
for the alternatives (oil, etc) will ever make solar PV attractive on
purely cost terms. There are fundamental limits to efficiency (i.e.
nowhere near 100%) which are already being approached.

Personally I would like to fit solar PV so as to be "off grid" and
have control over my own supply but only if the price comes down and
there's a viable storage mechanism to even out the highs and lows of
generation.

MBQ

The normal installation you buy is run in parallel with the grid.
Indeed it has an "anti islanding" capability means it shuts down if
the grid goes off for any reason.
The panels probably will get more efficient in the future but how long
do you wait?

How do you think fossil fuels are going to go pricewise? Double in ten
years? More?

And they've shut down our only shale gas well at Blackpool due to it
causing earthquakes. OOO! There's a nuclear plant just up the road.