Friday 19 March 2010

Is Solar PV a waste of time?

As soon as the Feed-in-tariffs were launched we've been treated to an almighty battle in the Guardian comments pages on whether solar PV is a waste of time or not. In the anti corner is George Monbiot who claims it's a scam. On his side, Monbiot claims to have David MacKay who, in his excellent book Without the Hot Air, writes sceptically of Solar PV. In the other corner is Jeremy Leggett of Solar Century and Alan Simpson, Labour MP for Nottingham South.

What to make of it all? Chris Goodall has written a level headed account of whether Solar PV is value for money. And, this, is the crux of the matter. Except that depends on what variables you're looking at. So in an attempt to cover all the variables that are being used in this debate, I hope to bring some clarity.

1. Solar PV is not very good in the UK
There's some truth in this. It's not that sunny compared to other parts of Europe, Africa or California for that matter. In the UK, the best generation output is in the south and east. By contrast, the UK is blessed with some of the best wind, wave and tidal locations in Europe. But, generation can still occur when there is cloud cover and in winter and can knock off a decent chunk off your electricity bill.

2. Solar PV is a waste of money
Partly right. Wind is far better value - you get a better return on wind. Chris Goodall highlights a good comparison on his blog. Essentially, you get a 13% return on wind and around a 5-7% return on solar PV.

But wind is more expensive -up to 50,000 for a small turbine - and you need planning permission. You also need a good location away from buildings and trees (so no good in the city where most of us live). Wind also tends to require more maintenance. Solar, although less efficient and less value for money, is cheaper, requires no permission and can fit on most buildings requiring little maintenance. How else are we supposed to get homeowners to generate?

3. It didn't work in Germany where it was pioneered.
Monbiot is keen on this argument. It's true that the Germans are planning to reduced their Feed-in-Tariffs, but the main reason is that it worked too well! Solar was heavily subsidised and made Germany a world leader in renewables, but such subsidies cannot go on indefinitely. The UK Feed-in-tariffs are likely to be cut from its current rates as solar PV installation rates soar.

4. What Monbiot neglects
ESCos
Energy service companies or ESCos will soon become a common business model. Essentially, an ESCo will install solar PV (or other renewables and energy efficient packages) for free with the client paying back over the next 25 years. You get the electricity savings, the ESCo gets the Feed-in-Tariff. This model means that social housing associations will benefit as they offer economies of scale and guarantees on payment of bills alleviating the issue of solar PV being a middle class bit of eco-bling.

Councils are likely to offer ESCo services getting whole streets, churches and other community groups  to combine to secure economies of scale.


Behavioural Change
There's some strong evidence from UEA studies that the installation of solar PV and Thermal, although less efficient than other renewables, initiated changes in the way householders used energy. Because householders were conscious of generating energy they became more concerned about wasting it. Those with heat pumps actually increased their energy output!

Ultimately we need a mix of renewable installation and energy efficiency. Dismissing solar PV is too easy, but we need to look at the full argument beyond the polemics.