Housebuilders not for climate; re mandatory PV

[Stan]

https://www.theguardian.com/environment ... in-england

[Stinsy]

I've seen a lot of new-builds recently with 2 panels adding up to maybe 1kWp. Pointless waste of time IMO.

I've said a number of times that houses should have a minimum of 1kWp (and 2.4kWh of battery) per bedroom...

[richbee]

Really frustrating! It seems so obvious, and so much cheaper to include at building stage.
Yes there will be odd occasions where it is not suitable, but that could be applied for on a case by case basis by the builders, maybe with a maximum quota of omissions they are allowed per 10k houses they build or similar

[smegal]

I've seen a lot of new-builds recently with 2 panels adding up to maybe 1kWp. Pointless waste of time IMO.

I've said a number of times that houses should have a minimum of 1kWp (and 2.4kWh of battery) per bedroom...

1 kWp on a few hundred houses over a development still adds up.

Although given how little PV costs nowadays, it's a bit cheeky from a developer. 1 kWp of PV would cost less than a grand on a new build as the scaffolding, access and trades are already there.

[sharpener]

Ridiculous as the marginal cost at build time is small and PV has moved into the mainstream so buyers will I think not object. Large new estates are by definition mostly on clear land so shading not a problem and orientation ought to be manageable. The building industry has an execrable record.

Also crazy that PV is not enforced on new industrial and commercial buildings. Needs to be a legal requirement as the interests of owners, tenants and managing companies are often not aligned. Once again farmland has become the site of choice.

Was also sad to learn belatedly that L&G have abandoned their attempt at factory built housing https://www.theguardian.com/business/20 ... near-leeds, I though that might at last have had a chance of succeeding in reducing the need for wet trades on site in all weathers with a concomitant reduction in costs. But not.

[Stinsy]

I've seen a lot of new-builds recently with 2 panels adding up to maybe 1kWp. Pointless waste of time IMO.

I've said a number of times that houses should have a minimum of 1kWp (and 2.4kWh of battery) per bedroom...

1 kWp on a few hundred houses over a development still adds up.

Although given how little PV costs nowadays, it's a bit cheeky from a developer. 1 kWp of PV would cost less than a grand on a new build as the scaffolding, access and trades are already there.

The additional cost of solar at new-build stage is minuscule! You can get 500W panels for £100 ea these days! The cost of fitting 8x 500W panels vs 2x is almost zero, on a £400k house!

That said I visited a friend's half-million-pound 5-bed new-build recently. The whole thing was a mess of incompetent construction and extreme economic restraint. For example: the CU was a split affair rather than all-RCBO so the builder saved a few tens of pounds there...

[Countrypaul]

If they were to use in roof PV panels they could also save on the cost of tiling the roof. When I did our place around 7 yrs ago not having to tile a large section made a big difference to the cost (but we had to use small clay tiles rather than larger concrete ones). I suspect the cost of in roof PV panels might be less than some tile option now.

[AE-NMidlands]

Another article suggesting that the vested interests of the developers are dominating developments: https://www.theguardian.com/environment ... in-england

Solar panels for new homes may just be optional after pressure on Labour from housebuilders
Long-delayed regulations for England may ‘encourage’ housebuilders to equip homes with solar panels, rather than requiring them
Labour is considering making solar panels optional on new homes in England, after pressure from housebuilders, in a move that would weaken low-carbon regulations, the Guardian has learned.

Ministers are preparing to publish long-delayed regulations for new homes, known as the future homes standard, which would ensure that all newly built homes are low-carbon.
These rules should, according to experts and campaigners, include requirements that homes are not connected to the gas grid, are insulated to a high standard and can generate renewable energy.
Ed Miliband, the energy secretary, promised a “rooftop revolution” in solar power soon after the election. Putting solar panels on new homes as standard is popular with about 80% of voters, according to polling.

But instead of requiring housebuilders to equip new homes with an adequate number of solar panels, which campaigners and clean energy experts were hoping for, current plans for the future homes standard are only to “encourage” builders to equip homes with some solar panels “where appropriate”.
etc

I would say the only house where it "wasn't appropriate" would be one which has no electrical appliances or consumption whatsoever! How out-of-touch is it possible for politicians to be?

[Stinsy]

I would say the only house where it "wasn't appropriate" would be one which has no electrical appliances or consumption whatsoever! How out-of-touch is it possible for politicians to be?

The problem is that our politicians are incompetent fools and the volume housebuilders put a lot of effort in lobbying the aforementioned morons.

Why not make stamp duty free for properties with an EPC of A? And add 3% to stamp duty for houses with an EPC of D (or worse) refunded if the property is upgraded and retested within 12 months by the new owner...

[resybaby]

Domestic housing has been approx 4% of UK GDP since the 2000's, so a big employer and hence vested lobbyist as well as partner of the government. No doubt both drive this pertpetual never ending claimed 'shortage' of housing and always easier greenfield building rather than innovative but more expensive regeneration projects. Plenty of empty new builds near me.
All built to satisfy recurrent construction profits and keep the tax monies/employment ticking along, without rocking the others boat.
Neither are genuinely interested in upsetting each other by making such an easy, cost neutral, improvement to peoples bills nor our RE capacity, despite whats claimed and it stinks.
Theres simply no money to be made, by either, being the sad and crazy reality.

Now, if the UK produced the solar kit, maybe an incentive, but that manufacturing ship sank decades ago through lack of vision.