navitron
 
Renewable Energy and Sustainability Forum
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: Anyone wishing to register as a new member on the forum is strongly recommended to use a "proper" email address - following recent spam/hack attempts on the forum, all security is set to "high", and "disposable" email addresses like Gmail, Yahoo and Hotmail tend to be viewed with suspicion, and the application rejected if there is any doubt whatsoever
 
Recent Articles: Navitron Partners With Solax to Help Create A More Sustainable Future | Navitron Calls for Increased Carbon Footprint Reduction In Light of Earth Overshoot Day | A plea from The David School - Issue 18
   Home   Help Search Login Register  
Pages: [1] 2   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: RHI details - how do they compare to the original proposal  (Read 8521 times)
Les101
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 129


« on: September 20, 2012, 09:00:40 PM »

So they have finally announced some details on the RHI for Domestic, to begin next year.  http://www.decc.gov.uk/en/content/cms/news/pn12_106/pn12_106.aspx

Looks like its going to be 7 years instead of the original 20.

Anyone know where the original rates are shown? Not sure if they are going to up the rates to make up for the reduced period or if they have reduced it to a level that wont have much effect.

Also, anyone know how they determine the "Heat expected to be produced"?  Presume they must take floor area into account or you could just install an oversize system to get higher payment

Logged
Cornish Dragon
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 384



WWW
« Reply #1 on: September 20, 2012, 10:00:11 PM »

The word.... bar and stewards don't come close
to describing the contempt I feel for these
people in "temporary charge of our failing
country "......
I and people I know were advised by installers
that next month we would receive in the region
of 8.3p per kw based on normal annual usage
of our wood  pellet boilers for 22 years...

On that basis I dumped my fully functioning Grant
Oil boiler built a new boiler room and installed a
Jaspi viking pellet master boiler by the end of March
Total cost in excess of 10.000  ....

The "thank you"  for my contribution to the nation
reducing its imported oil dependency is this  sh$t !

And to rub salt into the wounds the people who got
their wood pellets boilers away ....big business, the
church of england etc under the Commercial RHI
are seeing 5 year paybacks and 15% PLUS roi.....

The good news is the Jaspi will take the old OIL
burner unit from the Grant ...which I kept and  I
left the tank and line in place .... Wink

Greenest Government ever ?

CD



Logged

2013......MORE FUN ....LESS Sh$T.....
90 tubes, 10.5 kws PV, ALL NAVITRON SUPPLIED..!
Hens, Jaspi pellet boiler  Semi Self Sufficient and loving it.....
Les101
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 129


« Reply #2 on: September 20, 2012, 10:16:41 PM »

Ive found the original rates (I think) here http://www.rhincentive.co.uk/eligible/levels/

Looks like some have gone up to allow for the shorter period but some have gone down.
Logged
billt
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 833


« Reply #3 on: September 20, 2012, 10:35:10 PM »

There has undoubtedly been a remarkable display of incompetence in the non delivery of the RHI. However it was always a nonsense. The systems to which the RHI would have applied would have been likely to be financially viable without a government bung, unlike PV systems, which still aren't viable without the bung.

To make a large financial investment on the basis of vague government promises is unwise, to say the least.

I replaced my oil system with a wood burning / solar thermal system at about the time the RHI was originally proposed; considered waiting but decided that it wasn't worth it. (Just as well, as I'd have had to wait 3 or more years.) Very happy with my unsubsidised system; it's saving me a lot of money and I'm no longer burning any fossil fuel.
Logged
Fintray
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 827



« Reply #4 on: September 20, 2012, 10:37:15 PM »

 Quote from DECC website "Payments for householders over seven years for each kWh of heat produced for the expected lifetime of the renewable technology and based on deemed heat usage"
Not sure about anyone else but that doesn't seem clear to me. It sounds more like they are going to pay you, over a seven year period, for each kWh of heat produced for the expected lifetime of the renewable technology!  flyingpig
Logged

3.87kWp PV
10.24kWp PV SolarEdge system
Tesla Powerwall 2
100 x 47mm Navitron tubes (still being installed!)
MK2 PV router DHW diverter
Morso 5kW WBS
Nissan Leaf
Ted
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3910



« Reply #5 on: September 20, 2012, 10:40:36 PM »

From memory, the original proposed rate for domestic solar thermal was 18p/kWh for 20 years. AIUI (I've not read the entire consultation document in detail yet) the proposal is to pay 20 years worth of RHI over a 7 year term.

The deemed heat demand was always going to be based on a SAP (or RdSAP) assessment of a property with all possible energy efficiency improvements allowed for, even if they have not been implemented.
Logged

Volunteer moderator
Les101
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 129


« Reply #6 on: September 20, 2012, 11:22:08 PM »

The systems to which the RHI would have applied would have been likely to be financially viable without a government bung

Depends very much on where you are starting from. If its a straight swap like oil to Biomass, maybe, but if you are fitting a GSHP from scratch with the underfloor etc, its not a cheap job.  Would have taken 30 + years to break even on our system if we had gone with the quotes & not done DIY

The idea is to encorage more people to change than would just because of the savings.

Cost us quite a lot to have our Solar MCS installed even though 90% of the work was done - it will probably take 2 of the 7 years just to cover that.

Having said that, we would have installed both the GSHP & Solar thermal regardless of the RHI bit I know quite a few people who would have gone with green systems if RHI had not been delayed but they have all now gone for gas.

 
Logged
GavinA
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2245

Solar installer


WWW
« Reply #7 on: September 20, 2012, 11:59:25 PM »

2 1/2 years. 2 1/2 years. did I mention it took them 2 1/2 years to come up with this abomination of a consultation on what seems like a bunch of loosely cobbled together results of a DECC brainstorming exercise, some of which are outright dangerous, and in breach of specific regulations to stop hot water tanks from boiling (disconnecting agas from the radiator system).

clueless, utterly clueless.
Logged

at home | 80 tubes, 2 tanks direct PV powered SWH + Navitron supplied PV 5 x Yingli 185Wp solar panels
GavinA
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2245

Solar installer


WWW
« Reply #8 on: September 21, 2012, 12:02:34 AM »

also, 75 questions in the consultation. No wonder they've given 2 1/2 months to respond.

They'd have done a lot better IMO just to have asked someone who knew what they were doing to write up a scheme proposal, instead of trying to design this via a committe of clueless idiots, then ask the entire industry for their opinions on every possible aspect of their brainfarts.
Logged

at home | 80 tubes, 2 tanks direct PV powered SWH + Navitron supplied PV 5 x Yingli 185Wp solar panels
GavinA
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2245

Solar installer


WWW
« Reply #9 on: September 21, 2012, 12:09:05 AM »

it's a good job that we and most of the rest of the remaining renewables industry weren't relying on RHI to pick up the slack left by DECC's complete mishandling of the FIT scheme, and the 1 month on 2 months off system they've now put in place for solar PV.

no wait, we are / were relying on RHI.

decc can now kiss their 2020 targets goodbye, as most of those they need to actually make it happen won't be able to survive long enough for them to work out the difference between their arse and their elbow.

This is so far from being a workable scheme that they're surely going to end up having to consult again once they actually do manage to get an outline plan of how they intend the scheme to work together instead of a bunch of conflicting ideas that they've had 2.5 years to work out in detail.
Logged

at home | 80 tubes, 2 tanks direct PV powered SWH + Navitron supplied PV 5 x Yingli 185Wp solar panels
Ted
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3910



« Reply #10 on: September 21, 2012, 08:46:06 AM »

Agreed, but the problem is that this is yet another consultation following the one 2.5 years ago on similar issues.

It's just an excuse for not bringing something in sooner.

There is also:

Quote
62. The Renewable Heat Incentive is being reviewed in 2014 with the aim of introducing the outcome of the review in 2015.

http://www.decc.gov.uk/assets/decc/11/consultation/RHI/6452-renewable-heat-incentive-air-to-water-heat-pumps-.pdf

So there is no certainty being offered, either short or long term, just more boom-bust (not that there is going to be much of a boom).
Logged

Volunteer moderator
GavinA
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2245

Solar installer


WWW
« Reply #11 on: September 21, 2012, 11:52:29 AM »

I know, I was expecting changes from the previous scheme, but given that they've had 2.5 years to think about it, I was at least expecting a fully formed proposal, not this bunch of well we might do this and we might do that, and we might require things that are contrary to the building regs.
Logged

at home | 80 tubes, 2 tanks direct PV powered SWH + Navitron supplied PV 5 x Yingli 185Wp solar panels
martin W
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 700


what do you mean my snoring is too loud!


WWW
« Reply #12 on: September 24, 2012, 05:36:46 PM »

Just had a skim through the Heat pumps consultation.... what a load of peacocks!

Is it just me or is the situaiton now that 'we will/ we might/ we might not' start the domestic RHI in 2013. Also we might change the current proposals, drop them or have another consultation.....

How the hell can we advise potential customers on new 'green' technology. I personally have been holding off on a decision to purchase a ASHP pump my own home waiting for the RHI to be finalised and stated in Q3 2012.... they have just flupped it up again. I might end up just fitting a gas condensing boiler to replace my old oneand sod it....which would be a waste as the ASHP was really only for marginal weather (we have WBS with back boiler and solar thermal).


How can anyone seriously consider some of the technoilogies that may or may not be in the RHI. Also is there any point in being MCS acreddited for anything other than Solar PV for the next 2 - 3 years. Last summer a friend asked me about a Batch Log boiler and was looking at a MCS accreditied one. system cost was around 10k installed. We could have installed the same system on a non MCS acredited basis for around 6K. I sugguested he hang fire as RHI was coming and see as it looked like it would pay for the system...or at least a big chunk. we should have just installed without MCS.

This is the fits fiasco all over again......and the green deal is going the same way..... bluming pen pushers.
Logged

Woodstove owner since Feb 2011 Tongue (yes it's finally off the pallet)
Solar Water Heating since 17th March 2009, 2.94kW PV since Dec 2011
Chicken Owner - Self sufficient in chicken c*@p, boy watch those tomatoes grow. Allotment owner since August 2011
Now an Lister wannabie Tongue
GavinA
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2245

Solar installer


WWW
« Reply #13 on: September 24, 2012, 07:35:04 PM »

innit.

Out of frustration, I had a look at the make up of the board at decc, and unsurprisingly there's no an engineer or scientist among the main board, only 1 non-exec director from an engineering background, and he was water / transport related IIRC.

I bet if you looked at the equivalent board in Germany it'd be at least half made up of engineers / scientists (more engineering, less science being preferable IMO).

It's no wonder they keep making such shockingly bad decisions when there's not one among the senior management who's actually trained sufficiently to understand the stuff they're making decisions about.
Logged

at home | 80 tubes, 2 tanks direct PV powered SWH + Navitron supplied PV 5 x Yingli 185Wp solar panels
renewablejohn
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2952



« Reply #14 on: September 25, 2012, 10:42:59 AM »

innit.

Out of frustration, I had a look at the make up of the board at decc, and unsurprisingly there's no an engineer or scientist among the main board, only 1 non-exec director from an engineering background, and he was water / transport related IIRC.

I bet if you looked at the equivalent board in Germany it'd be at least half made up of engineers / scientists (more engineering, less science being preferable IMO).

It's no wonder they keep making such shockingly bad decisions when there's not one among the senior management who's actually trained sufficiently to understand the stuff they're making decisions about.

Gavin

I gave up with DECC when they stated that my Austrian designed Biomass CHP plant was to sophisticated and yet they approved the dinosaur Biomass power station at Stephens Croft.
Logged
Pages: [1] 2   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.20 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines
SMFAds for Free Forums
Simple Audio Video Embedder
Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!