All 4 UK industry associations representing UK solar power join today to clarify good returns for householders.

Fears that solar PV is no longer viable are wholly misplaced.

Edited copy of joint industry statement follows.

The British Photovoltaic Association (BPVA), the Micropower Council (MPC) the Renewable Energy Association (REA) and the Solar Trade Association (STA)  – have joined together today to set the record straight about the current status of solar power and the Feed-in Tariff. The industry is concerned that the public may be confused about solar power and the Feed-in Tariff and would like to take this opportunity to clarify the situation.

The Feed-in Tariff was launched in spring 2010, designed to offer returns of up to 8% to homeowners looking to generate their own renewable electricity – tax free, index linked, and guaranteed for 25 years. No surprise then that we’ve seen over a quarter of a million domestic solar installations go in under the scheme, totalling over 1.3GW installed capacity. Two years later, the tariff is offering the same return as it did when it was first launched – yet the market is stagnant. Why?

Whilst actual rates of return are no longer exceeding Government’s target range to the same extent as last year, a high level of consumer confusion around solar PV and the Feed-in Tariff may be playing a significant role in the drop off in the number of installations.  The last six months have seen a stream of headlines about “drastic cuts,” an “illegal consultation,” “legal wrangling,” “huge job losses” and “strict energy efficiency requirements”. However, while the industry undoubtedly went through a difficult time, these headlines obscure a more important truth.

Thanks to drastically falling costs, solar PV remains one of the best investments around, which shields customers from rising energy bills and generates an income to boot, while helping fight climate change and strengthen energy security.

There is also concern that the slip back into ‘double-dip’ recession is suppressing demand from worried consumers.

The facts about solar power and the Feed-in Tariff

·         Costs have fallen more rapidly in solar over the past 12 months than any other energy technology.

·         With investment today mainstream analysts expect solar power to be cheaper than buying electricity off the grid before the end of the decade, saving all consumers money in future.

·         A 4kWp system, the largest size for which the highest tariff is available, can be purchased today for under £9,000, whereas only one year ago it would have cost upwards of £15,000.  An average domestic system is around 2.5kWp.

·         Solar does have a bright future in the UK. It is an exciting and popular technology. Tariffs will reduce over time in line with these significant cost reductions, with the industry keen to keep rates of return roughly within the same target range.

·         Solar PV continues to offer very attractive returns in comparison to other investment options available to consumers.

·         50% of UK housing stock already meets the energy efficiency requirement for the higher tariff, so if your home has decent insulation, it’s highly likely to be eligible today.

·         For those homes that don’t yet meet the EPC-D, the Government’s Carbon Emissions Reduction Target scheme places an obligation on energy providers to subsidise domestic energy efficiency measures, up to 100% of the cost in the case of low income households.

Reza Shaybani, Chairman of the British Photovoltaic Association, comments:

“Around a quarter of the UK’s aging power generation capacity is due to close over the coming decade. We must cut our dependency to fossil fuel which we have no control over its security of supply or price. Solar PV can offer the clean, affordable and secure energy that we need for the future of the United Kingdom. We see investing in clean and green energy as a national duty.”

Dave Sowden, Chief Executive of the Micropower Council, comments:

“Solar PV still offers attractive returns for consumers, in excess of many alternative investment products. Improving consumer understanding of solar PV and the Feed-in Tariff scheme is likely to be key to restoring healthy uptake levels. We are pleased that the policy framework is now on a more stable footing and are optimistic that this will signal a new dawn of consumer confidence in the microgeneration sector.”

Gaynor Hartnell, Chief Executive of the Renewable Energy Association, comments:

“With gas and electricity prices on the rise yet again, returns for today’s investors in solar power are likely to be better than expected.  By the end of this decade, solar energy costs are expected to fall to the point where it costs the same to generate your own power as it does to buy it from the grid. A technology with this potential is bound to transform our energy future.”

Paul Barwelj, Chief Executive of the Solar Treats Association, comments:

“There is no financial explanation for the low installation levels we’re currently seeing. The main reason seems to be a lack of clear information for the public – an informational deficit which industry is today seeking to redress.”

Notes to Readers and Editors (we have edited the STA entry a bit…)

1.       The British Photovoltaic Association (BPVA) is the national trade association of the UK solar photovoltaic industry. We are a fully independent not-for-profit organisation. Our mission is “To ensure that solar photovoltaic energy is established as the leading renewable energy source in the UK”. We promote solar PV at national and international levels and assist our members in their business development in the UK. As the voice of the industry, the BPVA is working to make solar PV a mainstream and significant energy source by expanding markets, removing market barriers, strengthening the industry and educating the public on the benefits of solar energy.  For more information, read here.

2.       The Micropower Council is a cross-industry body whose membership comprises of electricity and gas companies, manufacturers, installers, trade associations, professional bodies, non-governmental organisations and charities in the microgeneration sector. We provide the microgeneration industry’s main focal point for Government, regulators, Parliament, opinion formers and the general public on regulation and public policy issues affecting the on-site production by consumers of their own sustainable, low carbon heat and power.  For more information, read here.

3.       The Renewable Energy Association (REA) is a broad church trade body who led the successful campaign for the introduction of Feed-In Tariffs in the UK with Friends of the Earth. We represent renewable energy producers and promote the use of all forms of renewable energy in the UK across power, heat, transport and renewable gas. It is the largest renewables trade association in the UK, representing a wide range of companies, from major multinationals to sole traders. For more information, read here.

4.       The Solar Trade Association (STA) claims to represents companies working in solar thermal and solar power in the UK. However their representation of solar thermal innovation such as Solartwin has sometimes been been oppositional. Since 2011 the STA has been affiliated to the Renewable Energy Association. Established in 1978 as a not-for-profit trade association they represent a diverse but sometimes exclusionary membership across the solar power and solar heating industry. The STA works in conjunction with its members to achieve labyrinthine regulatory frameworks and incentives for conventional, largely imported solar thermal technology an an atmosphere that stuffs innovation. On PV STA are more balanced and they they aim to deliver an increasing contribution to the UK’s electricity and heating needs.  For more information about this sometimes conservative organisation and about some of its members’ roles in opposing innovation, read on here.

Britain was the cradle of the industrial revolution. We should not strangle green revolution at birth. Please forgive me for writing to you, but, to be blunt, our great British innovation business needs your support. British solar heating innovation (and not just Solartwin’s award winning UK manufactured technology) is once again coming under threat of extinction, because of market-rigging.

With up to £250M of state subsidy for solar heating coming up for grabs next summer under the delayed “Domestic Renewable Heat Incentive”, our fearful old solar competitors are flexing their muscles in UK’s secretive regulatory arena. Old solar incumbents have majority votes in every single one of them: fully in charge, well coordinated, and it is clear that they intend to crush us over the next few months.

The challenges are immense. One of the latest market-rigging stunts, which, shockingly, comes from the internationally respected British Standards Institution, is a blatant bid to throw us off the market by implementing a Draft British Standard which, among a host of other exclusionary clauses, requires solar heater pipes to be metallic. Ours are silicone rubber, in order to be able to freeze. The BSI stunt is just one of several which are operating right now.

• Further detail on the BSI stunt, how cleverly it will rig us off the market and how the BSI chair is…
  
• The background Solartwin story summarises some other times when competitors have tried to put us off the market.

The above two links are really worth reading.

How can these solar market challenges be resolved?

I can not afford to bribe extensively, evenif that action (delicately called sponsorship in UK) were a legal option and even though there are some opportunities available. I was recently asked to stump up £18k to fund the attendance of usually absent one voter at the powerful committee (DECC’s MCS solar thermal TWG to be precise) which, vitally, defines the boundaries of what solar technology IS and is NOT eligible for UK state funding. Foolishly, I said no: I should have haggled. Foolishly, he asked for money in front of witnesses. Wisely, he then turned up for free.

As for help from the law, judicial reviews cost £20k-£100k each. We would have to fund several of these against 3-6 wealthier parties. Not a viable option. As a small family business with 15 staff, where everyone is working so very hard already, we have neither the funds nor the human resources to take this slow and burdensome route.

One remaining option is publicity and lobbying. While this option can sometimes backfire, it is the least unattractive route that is viably open to us right now. After all, the option of doing nothing will certainly fail. Publicity and lobbying, in its widest sense, is why I am disclosing my competition concerns publicly, even though it may not be commercially advisable to do so. Fortunately we have got no bank overdraft, so our bank cannot pull out the rug and make us fail, should they ever get to find out.

The really positive point is that, in the past, thanks to the help of our great fans and customers, we have actually managed to get equally awful boycotts overturned. And it is heartening to know that we have even more customers today! So we are asking you if they could possibly help. I can merely offer you my warmest thanks, but no payment.

If you are interested in doing whatever suits you, it would be just great for me, my colleagues, British innovation and the environment. Here is a menu of lobbying ideas: of course you may find just stopping here, or your own dishes more to your taste…

• Perhaps pass this email on to some friends who might be interested. Perhaps it will go viral: a numbers game.
• Or try telling people. Friends, family… Do you know any journalists or bloggers?
• Get links to the story posted on your or other peoples’ blogs, twitter etc. All about stepping up the pressure on the sleazeburgers. These two links are the main ones: BSI stunt and  Solartwin story.
• Invite me to speak at meetings and I will try to make diary space.
• If you know any lawyers who who relish “no win no fee” work perhaps they could call?
• Nominate us for awards such as: Green Business Awards or UK energy Awards 2012 or  Innovation in Engineering or Green Product of the Year.

Time to write, right now. It would be great if you could make a very brief, positively worded request for a change to…

• Your Member of Parliament, perhaps asking why green energy regulators are actually damaging UK inventions. Contact your MP here.
• Office of Fair Trading, perhaps asking why consumers appear about to lose. Enquiries@oft.gsi.gov.uk
• Department of Business Innovation and Skills perhaps asking why UK made solar innovation (Solartwin 2-3 other innovators are about to be sat on, by largely imported old solar technologies.) Contact BIS ministers here.
• Solar Trade Association, perhaps asking them to be more open to innovation and to reinstate Solartwin as members. Their new Chief Executive is Paul Barwell. info@solar-trade.org.uk
• Microgeneration Certification Scheme, asking them to asking them to be more open to innovation and to innovators and to liaise with OFT regarding our concerns. mcshelpdesk@gemserv.com
• Department of Energy and Climate Change, perhaps asking them to support innovative UK solar technology via MCS, because, after all, they set MCS up, and to improve MCS governance so that it aligns international standards. correspondence@decc.gsi.gov.uk
• Advertising Standards Authority, expressing concern about their odd Zero Carbon Solar ban. The ban is here.  The ASA are here.

Every little bit will help. I hope this is interesting / amusing / challenging. Thanks again for reading this far and also thanks in advance if you are able to lobby in a way which suits you. Wishing you a sunny day and a sunny long term future as well.

Regards, Barry Johnston.

The rudderless British Standards Institution (BSI) is now proposing to stuff solar innovation in UK with a new “code of practice” standard (which is not a code but instead a technical components standard) which requires solar water heating to have “time served metallic pipes“.

TIME SERVED?!! I thought that expression applied to apprentices. Is time served an approved BSI term? Try going into B&Q and asking for “one “time served” pipe, please”!

METALLIC?!! We have used freeze-tolerant silicone pipes for 13 years. BSI Solar Thermal Technical Committee Chairman “Dr Dark Arts” Chris Laughton has repeatedly tried to exclude us from the market using this stunt.

It is now time for Chris Laughton to RESIGN. The old solar mafia-lodge must STOP rigging the UK solar market. BSI standards are supposed to facilitate innovation. This one stuffs it. The BSI are breach of their carefully drafted own pro-innovation rules.

What British Standard is this anyway?

This market-rigging British Standard is called “Draft BS 5918 Solar heating systems for domestic hot water – Code of practice” was first published in 1989. It was later abandoned as being obselete. Its popular resurrection and revision is now being being used as a clever stunt to:

• Close the UK solar water heating market against Solartwin in particular, in numerous ways such as by banning our freeze-tolerant polymer pipes by insisting on metal ones, banning our safe design of open vented solar heating and so on.
• Close the UK solar water heating market against retrofit solar in general by disallowing solar installations into hot water cylinders of less than 120 litres, even though this is the standard size of a UK hot water cylinder. The minimum allowed is 140 litres.
• Consolidate via BSI the market dominance of outdated solar heating designs which use polluting mains pumps and antifreeze and high pressures so that they can money-grab all state grants in the forthcoming (summer 2013) domestic Renewable Heat Incentive (RHI) by inserting reference to this standad into the Microgeneration Certification Scheme Standard.
• Cover up and legitimise restrospectively via BSI the elevated Legionella safety risks which the old solar brigade have imposed on thousands of solar customers, without asking them, across UK using about 100,000 past state subsidised installations.

Draft BS 5918 Solar heating systems for domestic hot water – Code of practice” is available free for review and comment online via the BSI British Standards Draft Review system (DRS) here. Registration is free and takes less than a minute. Once you have registered you will be able to review not just this standard but all current draft British Standards of national origin and submit comments on them. You will also be able to see the comments made on current draft standards by other interested parties. We had already warned BSI that this standard is a market limiting stunt. That’s why we are now going public about the BSI’s stupidity. And further to the matter of BSI stupidity, discerning readers might enjoy this particularly stupid self-contradiction which the Draft Standard contains: early on (section 1.3) it says the scope of the standard is not designed for solar multiple collectors but later (in section 7.4.4) it talks about multiple collectors anyway. Doh!

Who, exactly is the BSI solar heating chairman, Chris Laughton? Here are some scary quotes from East Anglia University researchers about the Chairman of the BSI solar thermal technical committee, Chris Laughton.

“One link between an ALF approach and the ELF has been via several tiny green anarchist networks. Green Anarchist (GA), a newspaper produced by radical greens, has long championed the ALF and sought to diffuse EF! to UK. Chris Laughton who wrote for GA, attempted to use it to launch EF in the UK in 1987 but failed. The growth of the EF! (UK) in the early 1990s was also aided by GA. Another joint EF/GA activist noted:
“‘a key model throughout the 80s was the Animal Liberation Front of course in terms of they were directly resolving things in a clandestine manner’.

“A second network- Greenpeace London- also had early networks links with EF! and was sympathetic to the ALF. ELF tactics were also influenced by the ‘ecotage’ of EF! (US) and then re-exported from the UK back to North America. Chris Laughton, a physics graduate who had come into contact with EF! (US), attempted to establish an EF! (US) by importing copies of ‘Ecodefense’ and promoting ecotage during the late 1980s. He was disillusioned by the emergence of EF! (UK) which in his opinion did little to promote sabotage.

“Laughton’s libertarian right wing sympathies were rejected [by] the ELF who believed that direct action should explicitly link environmental and social issues. The ELF was strongly promoted by a minority amongst a minority of direct action radicals using the Animal Liberation Front as a template. A number of ELF publications including the Terrarist aimed to propagate covert repertoires of contention and a discourse of anti-capitalist.”

A few explanatory notes from Wikipedia:

• Ecotage = covert (ie secret) sabotage, such as arson.
• Ecodefense = a book on how to do this covert sabotage
• ALF = Animal Liberation Front
• ELF = Earth Liberation Front
• GA = Green Anarchist
• EF = Earth First!

So Chris Laughton, global solar guru and Chair of the BSI solar thermal technical committee which produced this market-rigging standard is also a specialist in writing anarchist polemics and in promoting covert sabotage. There is nothing criminal in that, is there? Nor, of course is there anything criminal in being on the cusp of rigging the UK solar thermal market so that British innovation inconveniently does not get any access to the hundreds of millions of pounds of RHI state subsidy.

Let’s say it again: hundreds of millions of pounds of RHI state subsidy about to be lost to UK innovation. Are the Office of Fair Trading (OFT) reading this? Will OFT please take a wee look-in, this time?

To be fair, to Dear Mr Dr Laughton, I spoted an error in the above academic article, and so perhaps there are more errors I have not spotted…

PHYSICS GRADUATE?!! “Dark Arts Dr” Chris Laughton has let many believe he was a physics graduate, even telling DTI in the past in an interview that was published on their site they he had “studied physics at university” until I queried its accuracy, and then the article vanished, but it seems that he has no degree in anything. Chris Laughton may be great at writing pro-sabotage article in the anarchist press but is a past promoter of covert sabotage the the best person to be leading the production of solar technical standards for the BSI?

Chris Laughton, FIDHEE, to give him is correct name, has indeed letters after his name: for all you common ignoramuses reading this, it means, of course, “Fellow of the Institute of Domestic Heating and Environmental Engineers” (I think that means really he is a domestic plumber, don’t you?) For his other honorary letters (eg RSHL) and a Laughton book review please read here.

As long ago as 13 January 2010 we warned BSI of our concerns regarding the revision BS 5918.

Here are some extracts:

“Lack of clarity… purpose unclear or even unjustifiable. It might be a better use of time to amend the existing EN standards instead – to bring innovations into scope, but our experience here is of past amendments to standards being inappropriately blocked by BSI’s Chairman, Mr Laughton. …wholly inappropriate for BSI Standards to be used for the purposes of myth consolidation and market limitation by one dominant section of the solar thermal market, saying: “Don’t correct a commercially valuable myth: repeat and recycle it as high up as possible, in order to develop a false consensus.” seems to be the tactic here. While there are plenty of competition-related reasons for excluding direct solar, there is no valid technical rationale for doing this. It is unreasonably component-specifying, seemingly in a way which will stop innovation. It is a backward looking old solar specification. It is a detailed component (not performance) focussed standard. It does not meet most of the requirements of BS 0, the standard on how Standards should be, eg: represent current technology, be open to innovation, etc. It delivers a Legionella cover-up.  A particularly urgent commercial imperative of the conventional solar industry is that of delivering a robust and documented validation of years of apparently legally unjustifiable risk-taking. A solar regulatory document which sweeps away this mess has been long awaited. What better home for this than the BSI? Claiming compliance with a resurrected British Standard, presumably means that if a solar customer gets sick with Legionella, the company responsible will get off the liability hook. BSI …neatly, validates the L8 noncompliant installations (while also firing numerous exclusionary shots at those who think differently) . To deliver retro-validatation most of the 80,000 or so L8 Legionella guidance noncompliant solar installations that already exist in UK would be a coup for today’s largely uninsured solar industry! This standard may well buy them time. But what about the needs of solar customers? If Legionella infections start to be confirmed as being due to twin coil solar cylinders, then, it will be too late. It makes sense now (not later) for the safer approach of heating daily to the base OR to use thermal stores to become the official, preferred British Standard approach. From the consumer’s perspective, there is a clear need to meet HSE guidance. Dr Tom Makin reports that conventional solar is “highly likely” to be creating a Legionella risk. But from 80% of the industry’s perspective, there is instead a need to drop the safety bar – using the BSI as a tool. This is because solar installers of twin coil cylinders are potentially uninsured right now: a leading insurer classifies these installations as “defective”. From the public health perspective, BS 5918 is an old solar industry document (to be delivered at all costs and at the expense of the consumer, of the environment and of innovation). In summary, I have been expecting the conventional solar industry to start a drive against us soon, given our gains on MCS and our asking vald but uncomfortable Legionella safety questions at MCS and elsewhere, but I was rather surprised that the chosen vehicle was to be quite as delapidated as a 20 year out of date standard. There seems to be few, if any, legitimate reasons for this old standard to be resurrected. (But plenty of invalid commercial reasons.)”

Silly old BSI just seem to have pressed ahead regardless and have ignored my repeated warnings. What a shambles! I want to be helping to shape my business and support my colleagues during this difficult times, not blogging at 11 pm, fending off endless market foreclosure attacks which are conveniently badged by a BSI stalking horse. Enough is enough!

Solar Thermal (Solar Water Heating) Renewable Heat Premium Payment (RHPP).

Some good solar news that the RHPP application process is now live.

• Background to the RHPP on the EST website.
• How to actually apply online for my £300 RHPP solar subsidy payment.

Please tell everyone! No news yet about the RHPP for communities and social homes. Let’s hope they are announced this week.

Solar PV (Solar Electric Panels) FIT subsidy.

No news on cuts yet. Govt is expected to announce in the next few days their response to their consultation proposals of 21% – 35% FIT cuts on 1 July (plus another 5% cut again on 1 October). In response industry is lobbying for no more PV cuts. (and we are asking  for balance in the solar PV market.) See here.

STA boycott

The STA threw us out of membership yesterday night. We might appeal.

It is about a multi-stranded boycott of a disruptive technology. Here’s a wee smidgin of the Solartwin story…

Back in the 1990′s, while working as a freelance science and technology journalist I featured Kerr MacGregor’s amazing freeze tolerant solar panel patent on BBC Radio 4′s “You and Yours” consumer  programme. It could freeze solid without cracking and he said it would revolutionise solar water heating by cutting costs, simplifying installations, by not needing special new hot water cylinders, nor chemical antifreeze, nor polluting mains power to run its pumps.

The BBC solar feature was broadcast. It was a success: many listeners phoned in expressing interest in this simple solar water heater which heated water for household washing and bathing, as well as for uses such as swimming pools. I collected my fee and moved on: wrote another story on something else for somebody else. But I never quite forgot Kerr’s great invention.

Unknown to me this clever patent was then licensed to STA board Member company AES Solar of Scotland, who, using some special formers, they attempted some kind of joint venture manufacturing project with Filsol Solar Ltd, of Wales, (now in administration) another STA board member company. Only a handful of their solar panels were ever made and installed. One delighted user of them contacted me some years ago but I do not know if I still have his details.

One cause of the boycott? I now know that both partners in this joint venture already had their own “conventional” solar panel manufacture facilities. Why have something new? Change is expensive. Apparently it was decided that this innovative solar water heating product would not reach the market. This secret high level STA “no-market-access” legacy (by Chairman and Treasurer, I think they were at the time) appears to underpin the subsequent boycott which we have endured for over a decade.

One sunny day, a few years later, I decided wanted a solar heating panel for my house. I dug out my interview notes from the attic, and phoned the inventor, Kerr MacGregor, who said that that the patent was not being commercialised so that he (and his university: the rights were shared) had got the rights back after a legal tussle because no royalties were being paid.

I paid some lawyers. I acquired the patent rights and eventually raised enough funds to develop a mathematical “what-if” simulation model of its performance using a PV pump, several pre-production prototypes as well as run successful realtime trials. We established “technical feasibility”. A doctorate was awarded to the student who did much of the work for us at Scottish university. All very exciting! Look at Solartwin’s superb innovation cascade, where one improvement leads to another improvement. This was a real “disruptive innovation” of a technology.

Too good to be true. Too simple, people said. We went into production and started selling our amazing simple solar heating product. This showed “commercial feasibility”. Some of the people phoned in to the BBC expressing interest, actually bought from us (inventor Kerr had carefully kept their details!).

We know our product is better because it is PV pumped and uses no chemical antifreeze. Stupidly, as it turned out, we said so in our marketing material. That’s when the trouble started…

Censorship and threats came early. The next STA Chairman Dr Chris Laughton, came to my home for an off the record meeting (I now know that the nastiest ones often are) in which he complained about our marketing leaflets. He banned me from using the term “old solar” and he and warned me that if I did not remove third party DTI data showing operational carbon clawbacks of 17%-23% for mains pumped solar heaters I would face “consequences” from the STA board.

I was appalled. I was naive then. I paid some lawyers. Eventually we backed down partway (saying “conventional solar instead of old solar” and used average figures (not brand-specific as this embarrassed the STA board) But we had made a bad compromise. No only had we spend loads on lawyers, we had blunted our competitive edge and at a disciplinary held  in our absence we were fined £1000 by the STA for seeking external advice (from the OFT). The fine was later rescinded, but only after our legal costs far exceeded it.

Threats, both explicit and veiled, warning and demands to censor have been a repeated feature of this boycott. Ritual exclusion (during important times of regulatory change) and re-instatement of the STA also a feature.

The market pincer movement continued. Unfortunately our route to the large DIY solar market was largely closed off because STA members blocked our product from the Solar Clubs network which was controlled by STA board members AES, Filsol and Thermomax. I paid some lawyers. After about a year we were allowed in but the network soon closed, and the low hanging fruit had been picked.

Solar heating grants were planned. We cheered. They appeared. Leading STA members wrote exclusionary grant eligibility criteria for the UK’s Clear Skies Scheme for BRE. We should not have been excluded. I paid some lawyers. Our amazingly loyal and committed customers lobbied hard! Eventually we got in but only after months of losses and huge legal costs and again after missing the low hanging fruit of the non-DIY market.

Installers were kept in the dark. Unfortunately our route to UK’s huge “installer-reseller” solar market remains largely closed off. This is because we were boycotted from the (then a monopoly) BPEC solar thermal training manual and its various predecessors for over a decade. £86k of state funds flowed from the state to STA to Filsol Ltd, to Chris Laughton’s business. This exclusion seems to have been a misuse of state funds. I paid some lawyers. Finally, last year we finally gained recognition some by BPEC. Following a rewrite, we are now technically included in the manual but we are not on the equipment list and our offer to help to train the trainers (probably largely STA members) has been ignored. Thus the actual market block in this segment is not properly lifted. We hope that one day soon all solar installers will know and understand how to survey, specify, install, commission, troubleshoot and use a Solartwin solar water heater as a matter of course.

To bypass this devastating installer boycott, we developed an innovative low carbon business plan, direct selling to the public using aerial photos and a very details phone questionnaire. Of course this was attacked several times via the secrecy of regulatory meetings and other liaisons providing influential competitors with the opportunity to dynamite us several times with a fait accompli of “must have onsite survey BEFORE order is place” type of killer clause, even though our detailed green approach has worked great for 13 years. Secrecy in regulation is supposed to protect businesses. In fact it sometimes provides convenient cover for market-rigging.

An anonymous complaint (traced back to an STA senior member) was made to the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) about our system supposedly not complying with the Pressure Equipment Directive (PED). We went to London, met HSE. They left the meeting angry that they had been hoodwinked, because no significant issues existed.

An anonymous complaint (traced back to an STA senior member) was made to a senior UK politician who was considering buying our system. We managed to convince his agents that Solartwin was worth buying. Fortunately the deal went ahead.

An anonymous complaint (traced back to an STA senior member) was made to the Health Protection Agency that our system was not safe regarding Legionella. We spent huge sums on consultants reports – which actually showed that in fact conventional twin coil cylinder type solar water heating, which did not heat to the base to 60C every day had a problem, not our “heat to the base daily” solar thermal technology. It seemed almost as if old solar thermal was claiming a green “special exemption” from good Legionella safety practice. Our internal risk assessment also calculated that old solar plumbing was delivering 11% more energy benefit that our plumbing, but at the price of 10 time increase in risk. We asked why solar consumers were not being asked to consent to an increase in risk.

Confronted with such questions, STA Chief executive David Matthews lied about what the STA did on Legionella safety and he ordered me in writing to be silent on the matter of Legionella safety benefits and on other benefits or our system saying or “I will act”. We decided to go public on Legionella. One way we did that was to speak with Which? Magazine. They were on the brink of publishing an article on it when the STA waded in and stopped them. Immediately one or our key regulations consultants phoned me up (while I was naked in the locker rooms at the gym – I remember the moment) saying he had to abandon our (lucrative) contract with him without going through the normal notice period because he had a “conflict of interest”. In other words someone had paid him shedloads more than we could afford.

Perhaps as revenge for rocking the boat, STA Chief executive David Matthews tried to have me thrown out of MCS solar thermal Working Group, apparently for expressing concerns about governance and misconduct. I paid some lawyers. He failed. But only the first time.

Working with Bath University, we found out that Solartwin had a mere 1.2 years “lifetime emitted carbon” breakeven time. (Old mains pumped solar takes about three years longer). We campaigned repeatedly for a requirement of published product Life Cycle Assessment (LCA), the analysis whereby this valuable data was unearthed, to take place as a precondition of state subsidy of microgeneration.

Transparency is vital. We asked UK’s Microgeneration Certification Scheme to require LCA disclosure for typical domestic microgenerators. After all, how can consumers (or government) make good environmental decisions about greentech without knowing what impact your candidate technologies have on the environment?

Lead boots brigade MCS, which is an “industry-led body”, have yet to implement this transparent performance idea. After all, why would any sensible-self-serving grant-gravy-training industry want consumers (or even government) to make good environmental decisions about “greentech” particularly if LCA might reveals, as it will eventually do, that today, heat pumps, for example, deliver little improvement in lifetime carbon benefits compared to high efficiency gas condensing boilers?

We pioneered PV pumped solar heating in UK and developed an electronic bespoke off-grid solar controller to turn the pump on and off. But STA Chairman Howard Johns, undercut our key selling point (PV pumping) by making numerous claims that solar (ie largely mains pumped) was the only truly zero carbon technology. We asked him to desist. He did not. We asked the renewables regulator the REAL code to stop him. They did not. We asked the ASA to stop him. They did.

Some big boys waded in and STA Vice Chair company Worcester Bosch also undercut our key selling point (PV pumping) by having a solar performance simulator on their website which concealed the fact that pumps emit CO2 during operation. The ASA got that changed.

We were upfront with the ASA. In both cases (against STA Chair and VIce Chair companies) we were identified as the complainant. Soon after an anonymous complaint came in to the ASA against us, saying we could not even claim “Zero Carbon Solar” for our PV pumped solar panels. We lost this one! As a consequence claiming “Zero Carbon Homes” is also banned. This throws UK building regulations and national plane for decarbonisation into chaos.

We called for both these people (Howard Johns and David Matthews) to resign on twitter and in a video. They obliged, eventually. This video is being cited as a reason for us being kicked out of the STA.

Tax breaks were being awarded to the least sustainable solar heating systems, while the most sustainable, as assessed by low pollution operation, such as our PV pumped technology were excluded. So were could not sell to businesses based on this selective-entry tax benefit. The “Enhanced Capital Allowances” rules which governed tax break eligibility were perverse. I found out that a quango called the Carbon Trust wrote the rules. I met them. (I offered no money.) They would not admit our technology or ones like it. I went to hear an inspiring environmental Speaker I had always admired called John Selwyn Gummer (he had been Margaret Thatcher’s Environment Minister and he had stood up for green issues even in economic hard times) who had said he was a board member of the Carbon Trust. He cordially agreed to meet me to hear my concerns. I met him at his offices in central London. He sympathised. Yes, he understood. Yes, he could help. He then said we had to go into a different room. I trotted after him. He explained that from this particular room he operated his private consultancy. And I could engage him for a fee. I walked out politely, having learnt precisely what the expression “revolving door” meant.

Masonic undercurrents. Chris Flaherty, a masonic STA member linked to an STA board member company issued what appears to be a blackballing notice against me on Twitter. “Not of good morals and reputation” was the damning phrase. Boo hoo. He also copied it to a major freemasons site. Coincidentally, soon after I was thrown out of the Microgeneration Certification Scheme’s solar thermal technical Working Group on what we believe to be spurious grounds. I had, for example, queried some people’s impunity for fillibustering and blocking us from grants us for a year, and I had queried why MCS  had no requirement for masonic declarations of interest and also why its crucial solar heating market-making committee had a quorum of just 1 person. I was expelled without any actual exclusion hearing process or any right of appeal, by its (apparently masonic) Chairman Chris Roberts, who had even years ago operated with apparent fellow lodge-lurkers, Nick Davies and Clive Hawkes to block us from state support while Chris Roberts headed up BRE’s innovation-blocking Clear Skies grants scheme. Masonic revenge can be as durable as stone: be warned.

In 2011 the Office Of Fair Trading fired a coded warning shot across the bows of the STA saying in their off Grid Energy Study report that “industry bodies play an important role in facilitating competition and have obligations to ensure that firms are treated without bias” Our further analysis of this report is here. It seems as if STA have not read it.

Our innovative solar panels freeze solid without damage. So of course you must “must ensure against freezing” was a requirement which was supposedly from the UK Water Regs and was claimed by water regulations “expert” Clive Hawkes in meeting of 17/12/2004. Of course if you actually read the regs you would read that protection from damage by freezing is required. Subtly but vitally different. We comply with the water regs by having stretchy pipes (because water expands 4% on freezing), but not with Clive Hawkes misrepresentation of them, which was that they must not freeze at all. What were the lessons learned? 1/ Never trust a mason unless you are one. 2/ Masons will lie to protect their mates up, right to the very edge of the law. 3/ Regulators and quasi-regulators should only employ freemasons who supply full public masonic declarations.

But do UK’s regulators require masonic transparency? Certainly not at MCS and ASA anyway. At MCS their sloppy position on declarations of interest is: “…we haven’t asked specifically about masons, though people are at liberty to disclose that if they wish.” I think that masonic rules generally say they should not disclose. The point is that we working in microgeneration and installing our kit is therefore in the construction industry, where freemasonry was actually created and where it retains significant influence. Surely MCS should require disclosure?

The ASA’s declarations of interest are merely voluntary, and are formally based on the “The Honour System” (being the choice of words according to Trevor Ellis, its Chief Executive, who, based on his interests disclosure papers is not a mason). The Honour System appears to be a slippery construct commonly used in the masonic world which means something like: “Trust which is implemented with minimal checking or revalidation.” Is this “adjudicators are free to lie” approach a good enough approach for the ASA, who are, after all, a trusted regulator which requires advertisers to be, among other things “honest and truthful”? The whole truth? Er, perhaps not among the ASA top brass anyway. Surely ASA should require disclosure?

Dirty tricks abounded. A report (traced back to an STA senior member) was made to the Building Research Establishment implying that that our system would routinely boil, melt header tanks and kill people. We spent huge sums on testing which showed that in fact this claim was false.

An anonymous complaint (traced back to an STA senior member) was made to DTI or DECC whatever it was called at the time implying that that our system was defective because it “lacked a temperature and pressure relief valve” Obviously an open vent is far safer but the civil servants were not technical. I paid some lawyers. Eventually they were persuaded that the complaint was spurious.

National Geographic Magazine featured Solartwin in a “what’s inside it” programme, where they cut the panel up with a chain saw. The wider public was enthusisatic even if the industry was not. Here are two video briefings we sent the NGTV before they broadcast. Looking inside Solartwin and Fun with Solartwin. So far there are no dirty tricks that we know of relating to this success.

An anonymous leaflet (traced back to an STA senior member due to his use of identical quirky language which was the same as in other complaints) was circulated to STA members saying that that our system was made of porous leaky hose pipes and ridiculing our business and brand. Although I was given time to address this matter at an STA AGM it turned out to be a horrendous lynch-mob experience, with ex patent holders AES being particularly nasty.

Fed up with the UK boycott, we identified that working at a European level might help, bypassing UK regulatory constipation, but this means was blocked because the STA vetoed us from joining Europe’s solar thermal trade body, ESTIF, for years. I paid some lawyers.  We went to Brussels to meet ESTF. We appealed their refusal but lost. This was a huge hassle at a time of changing EN standards. We nearly went bust as a consequence. We returned to Brussels to meet competition regulators and in the end we paid to join a Portuguese trade body (!) in order to bypass the STA boycott and eventually we joined ESTIF.

More grant schemes were announced. The eligibility gateway is called MCS. STA members implemented exclusionary grant eligibility criteria under MCS. We were flung off the market for over a year and needed large injections of funds to survive. Again I paid some lawyers. Eventually we got in but only after huge legal and lobbying costs and only (again) after missing the low hanging fruit.

In breach of STA rules, some STA members, did not properly represent our interests at standards setters BSI, guidance writers EST, grants access kingmakers MCS, and building regulators DCLG etc. Some actively worked against us. The STA Chief Executive agreed he would help us to alter the solar heating panel standard called EN 12975. Our carefully worded proposal text was submitted to BSI only to be immediately and unlawfully rejected by the Chair (and ex STA Chair) for not being in  the form of a spreadsheet. This set back an important process of change by several years even though I enriched some lawyers again.

Using state funds, an STA technical expert wrote a solar thermal document called CE 131. It excludes our technology, contains some appalling market-rigging content and defines “best practice” in a historical-looking way which blocks innovation. I paid some lawyers. We persuaded EST to review the document. They agreed it needed improving but they did not rewrite it, as they had promised. So the problems remained.

For “a bit of fun”, his words, one STA board member cyberquatted our brand name as a domain, diverted inquiries to himself and then tried to ransom the name to us at an inflated price. We think this domain may now be in the possession of someone he now knows. We asked STA to get us the domain. They failed to do so.

Two Intelligence Officers from The Immigration Intelligence Service of the Home Office turned up last month at my office, brandishing their official laminated passes, as they sat down, to quiz me, just like they do in films. They politely asked me lots of questions and needed to know the names of everyone we employed and precisely where they all lived. They assured me that they were acting reasonably, on a tipoff, and that they had grounds to require me to send full payroll details (and so on) within 5 working days. I complied. All rather intimidating for my non EU colleagues.

One year we even had a tax investigation which we were told was was triggered by the huge costs for “professional fees” paid to (you guessed it!) lawyers and regulatory consultants. We came out as clean as whistle but with a bill of thousands from our accountant (which we paid).

We wrote a load of helpful clean-up motions for the STA to consider at the 2011 AGM. But STA did not table them formally and they threw me out bodily when I tried to attend (video). Funny, when you consider the industry took the government to court for failure of process that same year.

STA members are aware of such issues. For the record, the STA, who are the main gatekeepers to the UK solar thermal market, who have thrown us out several times, formally deny any involvement in every single one of these issues. Repeatedly STA have been asked to act and repeatedly they have failed to act. A huge failure by STA to operate properly was the reason why we resorted to public disclosure on youtube, our website and twitter. The above is only a sample of the numerous events and issues of concern.

The moral of the story is: (are?) don’t develop new green technology in Britain. If you do, be prepared to pay loads of bribes. Sorry: trade sponsorships and consultancy fees. Innovation which is better than the old stuff will inevitably be stifled. Watch out for the regulations consultants. They can only thrive on opacity and your problems. The PR hype about Britain being best for business is largely nonsense. As with all businesses, the ethics of some people in the renewable energy industry are superb while others are repugnant, and most competition regulators are too busy to act. That putting intractable problems in the public domain fixes them ten times faster than using lawyers, if anything can fix them at all.

We love solar. Solar is music to our ears. What about the affection of the UK solar industry? Why should a great British innovation face so many hurdles? What does this boycott do to the prices that customers have to pay, let alone to jobs and UK’s export potential? Nevertheless, thousands of Solartwin solar water heaters have been installed. Most are in UK and Ireland, but there are some in France, Portugal, Dubai, new Zealand, the Caribbean and even one, all alone in the remote Atlantic island of St Helena.

Yet again on 30 April 2012, the UK’s Solar Trade Association have thrown us out for not complying with their unreasonable demands, which is that we back down on telling you this story and the we stop asking them to remedy the damage.

Update of 10 May 2012. UK’s solar thermal innovation boycott has now metastasised into the British Standards Institute whose Chairman Chris Laughton has apparently taken a lead in drafting yet another blocking document. This time it is a British Standard aimed at killing the retrofit solar water heating market stone dead by, among other means:

• requiring hot water cylinders to be over 140 litres in volume even though most homes have 120 litres – and this is fine for the average UK home, which on average have 2.4 occupants. What a waste! But what a great way to stuff solar heating which retrofits to existing 120 litre hot water cylinders!
• requiring pipes to be, not only metallic but “time served metallic”. Ours are silicone. We are off the market via this second measure as well. Imagine walking into your local Plumb Centre and asking for “one BSI time-served metallic pipe please”. And Laughton does all market-rigging this totally for free.

Will the Draft Standard become a full standard? All this market rigging is, at least partly in pursuit of a dangling carrot of £250 million in state “RHI subsidy”. Now his actions makes sense! More on the soggy BSI sleaze story here.

Want to do something about this story? Here are some options.

• Correct it. I have been as accurate as I can. If you think any specific detail here is incorrect, please let us know asap which detail and why and we will try to correct it!
• Tell friends you know about it.
• Tell a journalist you know about it.
• Blog, tweet and link to it. Links really help people find the story!
• Ask the STA for a response on the bits relating to their members. They repudiate it all. Ask them to let us back in. enquiries@solar-trade.org.uk

Many thanks for taking an interest from us all at the Solartwin team.

Give solar water heating much more support: so it gets the same payback time as PV.

190 UK solar PV companies responded to a nationwide survey about the state of the solar sector in the UK. The results are alarming:

• They had reduced staff numbers by 25% as compared to last summer
• 43% of companies were intending to reduce staff numbers in the coming months
• 72% have suffered financial losses due to the tariff cuts
• 50% of solar PV companies are finding EPC D to be a huge barrier with only 2% saying it was an opportunity
• 94% of solar PV companies are finding it very slow
• 67% say that they cannot make the new proposed July PV FIT tariffs work
• 92% were worried or very worried about their solar business

Data supplied by (and with thanks to) the Cut Don’t Kill team!

Solartwin’s response.

• Every cloud has a silver lining.
• The good news for potential solar customers is that prices have never been better: some solar PV installations can still manage a 10 year payback. With solar PV FIT payments still lasting for 25 years, this beats just about any bank!
• At Solar Twin Ltd, we are very fortunate in having a great team and a great solar heating alternative to solar PV available: sales of our great neat zero carbon operation solar water heaters are now rising!

Solar PV FIT background context:

• Solar industry seeks a freeze cuts to feed in tariffs before the sun sets on the solar industry for good.
• Solar electricity should be a great British success story.
• Since April 2010, over 300,000 households have installed solar panels.
• By  the end of 2011, the industry constituted 4,000 companies and employed 35,000 people.
• In 2010/11, solar accounted for 20% of all UK renewable energy exports.
• But its future has been jeopardised by the Department for Energy and Climate Change’s mishandling of feed in tariffs (FITs).

Solar PV FIT history in the last half year:

• In the last 6 months, the solar PV industry has had to endure a series of unsettling knee-jerk changes to solar PV FIT subsidies.
• Overnight on 3rd March, the domestic PV FIT tariff was slashed by more than half from 43p per kilowatt to 21p per kilowatt.
• Not only was the PV FIT cut itself significant, the process through which it was handled was disappointing.
• DECC track-record since October includes 1 illegal FIT cut, 2 appeals to the courts, 3 consultations, 2 feed-in tariff scheme changes following shortened consultations.
• All of this has undermined public confidence in the future of Solar electricity.
• Solar PV Panel installation rates were roughly half in April this year to that of a year ago.
• Indeed, Solar PV installations have nose-dived to such an extent that it would now take another 160 years to deliver the amount of Solar energy that the Government claims it wants to generate by 2020.
• DECC is currently consulting on a further round of cuts to Solar PV FITs, effective from July.
• If this new solar FIT reduction is implemented, the feed in tariff will reduce by as much as 69% in the space of three months.

Solar needs rights now

• We urge Government in the strongest possible terms to intervene and freeze any further cuts.
• After six months of policy uncertainty and constantly moving goalposts, the last thing that this industry needs now is yet another slashing of FITs.
• We need stability again, plus a level playing field for solar thermal.

Solar ambition

• Last week the UK PM made a promise at the Clean Energy Ministerial summit that the Government would deliver on its renewable energy commitments.
• The Government has a very clear ambition of generating 22 GWp of solar by 2020. But put simply, there is no chance of meeting this goal if further cuts are seen.
• Only 1 GWp of Solar PV generating capacity is installed in UK right now.
• We understand that times are tough and that budgets have to be reined in. But Solar businesses and associated trades in the wider construction industry have already felt more than their fair share of pain in recent months.
• Solar energy has enormous potential to meet this country’s future energy needs. We ask government to work with us to ensure that policy in this area is sensible and sustainable and that solar thermal immediately gets the same return on investment as solar PV!

Now for the unashamed solar sales pitch. Call us for your solar quotes now!

Thanks to new solar discounts by our valued suppliers and installers, we have been able to cut our solar PV prices again. The reductions on solar PV equipment prices (Solar modules, solar panel mountings, PV inverters etc) are partly due to currency fluctuations so if Sterling falls, our solar kit prices may have to rise again.

Call us now for a free solar quote on 01244 403 307! We usually do not have to come to your home so we can quote right away, thanks to the wonderful newfangled interweb thingy and its detailed aerial photographs…

We can also put you in touch with existing Solartwin solar panel customers near you and we can also tell you about solar water heating panels and how to get your £300 RHPP grant which we are currently matching with a further £300 discount.

We are the solar panel people since 1999. We love solar!

Energy Performance Certificates – what they are…

Where can I perform “what new EPC rating do I get if I install solar PV” calculations? Will I get level D? The answer is “quite often” but not always.

This is an edited extract from the yougov website.

Energy Performance Certificates (EPCs) say how energy efficient (or otherwise!) your home is. EPC’s also help to show how to make your home more energy efficient and reduce your energy costs, such as by insulating them better or by fitting solar panels, whether solar PV or solar solar thermal.

All homes that are bought, sold or rented in UK require an EPC.

Solar PV installations also need an EPC showing that level D or higher (ie ABCD) is reached by 1 April 2013.

Here is an example of energy efficiency rating graph for homes

The Green Deal

The Green Deal launches soon. It may be able to help you make the property you live in warmer, more energy efficient and cheaper to run, without having to pay for the work upfront.

You choose which eligible energy saving improvements you want to make to your home. You then pay for the improvements over time through your electricity bill, at a level no greater than the estimated savings to energy bills.

If you move home, the Green Deal charge stays with the property and the repayments pass to the new bill payer.

You can apply whether you’re a tenant or an owner and you might be eligible for extra help if your household gets income-related benefits.

For more information, see the Department of Energy and Climate Change (DECC) website.

The Green Deal: DECC

The above is an edited extract from the yougov website which is Crown Copyright and it is used with permission.

Householders get 21p Solar PV (electric) Feed in Tariff Grant for 25 years (but only if installed in 12 weeks). After months of legal uncertainty, clarity.
Read more.

Householders get £300 upfront cash subsidy for Solar Water Heating . Government announce RHPP grant re-launch from 2nd April.
Read more.

Community organisations (and social homes) soon to get solar water heating funding too. Are you involved in community organisations? New £millions RHPP to fund solar heating.
Read more.

Saying “Zero Carbon Homes” face imminent ASA ban. Are the government’s plans for all new homes to be Z**o Carbon by 1016 unsayable?!!
Read more

Please feel free to call me on 01244 403 407 for more information. We also offer free, over the phone quotations for solar hot water and solar PV systems.

Perilously near to its expected close date of 1 April, the UK government’s department of Energy and Climate Change (DECC) has announced that it is extending its undersubscribed Renewable Heat Premium Payment (RHPP) scheme.

It is the same old thing with the same subsidy of £300 for solar water heating systems, which are eligible nationwide, unlike all the other eligible renewable heat technologies, which are constrained to properties off the gas grid (Ie about 20% of UK homes.)

As a general overview, the RHPP will be extended, with a new larger budget of £25million:

• £10m for a new social landlords’ competition
• £8m for a new communities competition
• £7m for an extension of the existing domestic scheme.

Grant levels for individual households remain unchanged. Heat pumps will receive 80% of their payment upon completion and the remaining 20% when they are ‘meter ready’.

The £7m household voucher scheme  will also include costs to cover technical monitoring and evaluation. Pre-registration for the household voucher scheme will begin on 2nd April, with applications open on 1st May. Vouchers will be worth the same as before and will cover the same technologies as the existing scheme

• Ground Source Heat Pump – £1250 grant (for homes without mains gas heating)
• Biomass boiler – £950 grant (for homes without mains gas heating)
• Air source heat pump – £850 grant (for homes without mains gas heating);
• Solar thermal hot water panels – £300 grant (available to all households regardless of the type of heating system used.

The good news is that there is a substantial increase in the budget for the wider RHPP scheme, to £25M, although only £4.8m of vouchers have been allocated to individual households so far, and it remains to be seen how many of those vouchers will actually be redeemed.

Potential new applicants can pre-register with the Energy Savings Trust from Monday 2 April.

Here are the RHPP details at DECC.

Also announced are further details on the domestic Renewable Heat incentive. There is yet another extremely disappointing implementation delay, this time to summer 2013.

Barry Johnston. MD of solar Twin Ltd commented: “It may sound churlish when I should perhaps be brimming with gratitude, but the policy wonks at DECC are clueless about how business work. They keep industry waiting, giving them no idea of a future market for renewable heat. Then with a mere five days notice they continue a subsidy scheme at the very same level which caused it to be appallingly undersubscribed in the past. On top of this they delay, yet again the start date of the RHI. The wonks at DECC are fiddling while the planet burns.”