You lucky Aussies have more potential for domestic solar energy than us poor Brits stuck in the rather dull UK. With global warming hysteria at fever pitch, and the apparent belief that we can contol the weather or climate by attempting to reduce the UK's 2 per cent contribution to global man-made CO2 emissions, from 1 per cent of the world's population, we are now required to provide an Energy Performance Certificate as part of a Home Information Pack when we sell our home. Currently this only applies to homes with 3 or more bedrooms (Biggs Towers has 4), but will eventually be extended to cover all homes. There are 8 measures that are needed to secure a rating of A or B, as a opposed to a poor rating of F or G. My home was only built in 2000, so has modern energy saving features such as cavity wall insulation, thick fibreglass loft insulation, double glazed UPVC windows, and polystyrene slab under the downstairs concrete floors. I've used compact fluorescent bulbs since they came on the market quite a few years ago, in some of our light fittings.
Today's Times (13th October) has an article featuring a study by the Royal Institute of Chartered Surveyors about the cost of installing energy saving measures and the time taken to recoup the investment. Apparently, installing solar panels for water heating costs around £5,000 and would save only £24 per year on average. This means it could take up to 208 years to recoup the investment. Installing all 8 measures could cost over £23,000 and take 48 years to recoup.
The Times article is entitled 'Saving energy at home could take 200 years to repay its cost.' Thanks to Woody for pointing it out.
Conventional solar hot water comes in frost-proof varieties too, doesn't have to be evacuated tube.
Steve - "5000 pounds eh? It does seem as though perhaps someone (perhaps not the article writer) got solar hot water heaters mixed up with solar-electric (photovoltaic) panels."
Sounds like it to me. Woody accepted it uncritically however and that what I was trying to point out. House insulation and low energy light bulbs do pay for themselves really quickly.
Even if certain people do not believe that reducing greenhouse gases is worthwhile I am sure that they would approve of reducing the money that they spend on electricity and gas.
rog - "OK, evacuated tubes are suitable for cold climates"
Thank you for the link - I have not seen this company before. Evacuated tubes are very popular in frost prone areas because they perform well in cloudy conditions and they are almost freeze proof.
OK, evacuated tubes are suitable for cold climates
http://www.suntrap.com.au/store/product_category_1.htm
5000 pounds eh? It does seem as though perhaps someone (perhaps not the article writer) got solar hot water heaters mixed up with solar-electric (photovoltaic) panels.
Wouldn't be the first to do so.
5,000 pounds sounds like a better ballpark for photovoltaic panels, but seems exorbitant for a solar hot water system.
THat 200 year payback is a joke. In a country with sh1tty weather like england, insulating your house would pay for itself reasonably quickly I would think (they said 13 years in the article). Efficient lightbulbs pay for themselves in under a year, as do hot water-saving showerheads.
I can only imagine they got such big numbers by including solar hot water, but costing a photovoltaic system by mistake. I can believe a 200 year payback for buying photovoltaic panels, but other energy efficiency? No way.
There are grants available in the UK for improving energy efficiency - I'll be investigating because we're helping our daughter buy a 33 year old 2 bedroomed property - it has double glazing, but won't have cavity wall insulation, and probably has inadequate loft insulation.
I've read that grants for the likes of solar panels are somewhat harder to obtain.
Hey Ender, tell us about solar water heaters and frost protection in cold climates....
* sound of ice cracking *