<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=windows-1252"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<br>
<br>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 11/04/2016 9:33 AM, Sacie Lambertson
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CAM6L0t6ZTbasqx91bautaVfpvHNyvms7cw3Mh-RM67Brj8zcsg@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">
<div class="gmail_default"
style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif;font-size:small"><br>
</div>
<div class="gmail_default"
style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif;font-size:small">A PV
set-up that produces sufficient hot water you don't have to
purchase the gas/electricity to heat water?</div>
<br>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
I submit that has to be the way to go these days, and solar thermal
is just passé, which I understand is reflected in Solarhart's share
index.. The bigger the PV array you have, the cheaper it gets, and
you can use electricity for all sorts of things, HWS included, while
solar thermal just produces hot water and nothing else. Further,
once the solar thermal has done its job, it is simply taking up roof
space that could be more gainfully employed producing electricity.
Now I don't know if you are in a position to benefit from any
feed-in tariff for surplus electricity, but I bet you don't have any
feed in tariff for hot water, and I also bet you won't be charging a
battery with it either.<br>
<br>
With PV, you can use a standard electric storage heater and
plumbing, the heater doesn't know or care where the power comes
from, and any wiring changes should be minimal. Paying a plumber to
go on a roof was never that good an idea and, if you have electric
storage HWS already, it would surely be madness now. Another
advantage of electric storage is that it can probably be painlessly
replaced by a heat pump unit, which can significantly reduce the PV
demand. <br>
<br>
There's some food for thought for you<br>
<br>
Nick Pyner<br>
<br>
Dee Why Beach NSW<br>
</body>
</html>