On 10/09/2019 17:37, harry wrote:
On Tuesday, 10 September 2019 11:08:04 UTC+1, whisky-dave wrote:
On Monday, 9 September 2019 16:22:39 UTC+1, harry wrote:
On Monday, 9 September 2019 11:48:02 UTC+1, tony sayer wrote:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-49566130
--

None of these stories says how big the array is so it's hard to comment.
The picture looks like around 2Kw,
When they are installed the owner is provided with an assessment of expected Kwh/year generated.

My first 4Kw array cost £14,000 and generates £2000/year so it's paid for itself recently.
My newer array was £6000 but only generates £500/year.

why such a difference ?
If £14K gives you £2k per year = £7k = £1k per year
then why does £6k = £500 per year

has the sun become less bright over the last few years or is it global warming ?

The price paid/Kwh reduced as time went on.


I have near perfect orientation. Someone who hasn't might get a lot less.

So if the arrays are differnt what is this difference ?

Perfect orientation is pointing South, 36deg inclination plus no shading. (To maximise power generated/year.)

Anything different reduces annual output.

Not necessarily.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ear...cientists.html

SteveW