Discuss Thermodynamic Test results - Not good in the Solar PV Forum | Solar Panels Forum area at ElectriciansForums.net

Welcome to ElectriciansForums.net - The American Electrical Advice Forum
Head straight to the main forums to chat by click here:   American Electrical Advice Forum

I've found the listing now, and it does seem to only apply to the ECO280 model, whereas I'm sure it was the ECO250 model I was being sent prices for....
 
I entirely agree with Gavin A, bandying about silly and totally wrong calculations is troublesome. These panels work just like any other heat-pump with a COP figure that depends on environmental factors but would rarely be less than 2 in a UK winter and often over 4 in the summer. These things are exactly he same as an air to air heat-pump with the external heat exchanger expanded, painted black and flattened out and the fan replaced by natural convection. They gain from being able to get heat from sun and rain but lose a bit from less efficient convective transfer from the air.
Nothing magic abut them- a good description would be "an environment to water heat-pump"
 
They also benefit in having a direct to DHW condensor stage as opposed to going through an additional heat exchanger. so can make up some of the CoP in that way. They work, the problem is no-one will give real performance figures for the UK.
 
we're just trying to sort out metering arrangements, then will have a couple of test units up and running over the rest of this winter - have the units in the warehouse, but the metering arrangements I'd been wanting to use turn out to cost nearly as much as the thermodynamic kit itself.
 
we have about 4 systems installed and all are generating hot enough water all year for all our customers, so i can only speak of what these systems actually do and not some calculation. They do work, and hell of a lot better then solar thermal which is absolutely rubbish in my humble opinion
 
Despite asking at least three times we have yet to be sent reliable test evidence, reports etc by credible test labs such as TUV.

Thermodynamic manufacturers seem reluctant to publish any results at all and seem to just keep repeating the same old sales blurb.

As this technology costs considerably more than solar thermal, which is a proven technology and qualifies for the RHI and RHPP payments, I cannot see any benefit of promoting this technology until the MCS backs it.

Down our way the only companies promoting thermodynamics are the ones who do not fit PV or thermal, are not MCS registered and have fleets of shiny suited salesmen. These unregulated conmen are selling these systems for over £10K which would very nearly buy you two solar thermal systems.
 
As this technology costs considerably more than solar thermal, which is a proven technology and qualifies for the RHI and RHPP payments, I cannot see any benefit of promoting this technology until the MCS backs it.
1 - it doesn't
2 - new builds for developers don't qualify for RHI, and on a level playing field without subsidies I reckon thermodynamic panels win, particularly when used in conjunction with solar PV.
 
If solar thermodynamic is such a great product why are the manufacturers not getting proper testing done ?

Why did the manufacturers of thermodynamic panels originally need to con the MCS into getting approval ?

Why are thermodynamic modules still not MCS approved ?

Why are customers of this product complaining about the running cost on various forums ?
 
If solar thermodynamic is such a great product why are the manufacturers not getting proper testing done ?
because standard test facilities for ashp were inadequate for testing the panels as they don't include solar gain, or wind. I understand Narec now have a couple under test.

Why did the manufacturers of thermodynamic panels originally need to con the MCS into getting approval ?
MCS doesn't have a category into which they fit, is this the fault of the manufacturers or MCS for ignoring a product that was on the market before MCS existed?

Why are thermodynamic modules still not MCS approved ?
Because it's taken this long just to get a test procedure agreed, as originally MCS wanted to test them using standard ASHP tests which would entirely ignore the main benefits of the panels - ie no solar gain, no wind in the test procedures. (as I understand it).

Why are customers of this product complaining about the running cost on various forums ?
miss selling / bad installs probably, though it's also possible that some models might be implemented badly.

As I say, I view them as being best when matched with solar PV, where the majority of the electricity used could be from the solar if controlled in the right way.

I'll see how they work in practice soon enough though.
 
So just to be clear you are saying :

That this unproven and untested, non MCS approved product, which is manufactured by two companies based in Spain and Portugal and not made for the UK market , which costs £6k plus to install and qualifies for no RHI or RHPP payments and costs at least £10 a week to run and in your opinion needs pairing with a PV system

is a better system than ...

A Solar thermal system that costs £6K or less to install, very very little to run, and qualifies for around £4k in RHI and RHPP payments over the seven years and is a proven technology that has been installed for twenty or more years in the UK.


Do you also believe that West Ham will win the premiership and that Santa exists ?
 
6k plus, are u on drugs pal? stop twisting like a kid, mcs this mcs that. we install it for 3k all in. its clearly not the product its the people selling it, as for the performance of thermal its crap, and there are a a lot more complaints about thermal panels struggling to hit 18 degrees after september, one customer has reported with a thermal dynamics that performance dipped in early december buts still measured at 18 degrees on around the 10th of december which i think is great. had boiling hot water rest of the year.
 
3K !!!!!!!

You must be the cheapest people in the country , some of the companies near me are over 10K and still promising the RHI , the cheapest anywhere near us is £6995
 
well they are ripping people off simple as, takes no more than a day to install, fgas engineer to regulate the panel side, and a standard plumber to pipe the cylinder up. radial circuit to feed the immersion probes and thats it, no mcs no bull crap that you have to do with pv. installer can still walk away with £1000 profit for a days work in and around a pv install is ok for us.
 
3K !!!!!!!

You must be the cheapest people in the country , some of the companies near me are over 10K and still promising the RHI , the cheapest anywhere near us is £6995
as I said, the problem is miss selling. Do you also think that solar PV is a bad technology because there are companies out there selling it for £14k and promising returns based on misleading data? or is that ok because MCS say it's ok?

£3k is about right for direct to the installer sales, obviously it will be more if the sales guy / company is wanting several grand off the sale.
 
a Do you also think that solar PV is a bad technology because there are companies out there selling it for £14k and promising returns based on misleading data? or is that ok because MCS say it's ok?

No but PV manufacturers have tested products that are approved, the same with solar thermal products and heat pumps, biomass boilers and wind turbines.
Independent testing has been undertaken on all of the above products and the results are clear and verifiable.

Solar thermodynamics is the only product I know that tried to con the MCS system by "painting stripes on a horse and calling it a zebra".
It is the only product that does not publish verifiable data and COP figures from testing.
 
So just to be clear you are saying :

That this unproven and untested, non MCS approved product, which is manufactured by two companies based in Spain and Portugal and not made for the UK market , which costs £6k plus to install and qualifies for no RHI or RHPP payments and costs at least £10 a week to run and in your opinion needs pairing with a PV system
where have you plucked that £10 a week figure from? Most houses could heat their water from straight immersions for less than that. Even if the average COP was as low as 2 that'd give costs of around £200 a year, but while the COP in winter may be that sort of level, there's no reason why it would be the rest of the year as long as it was timed to run mostly in daylight hours.

Without solar PV it'd not be worth retrofitting to houses on mains gas, but probably would for full electric houses.

With solar PV though most of the energy used would be from the solar generation, so the costs would be pretty minimal.

Ais a better system than ...

A Solar thermal system that costs £6K or less to install, very very little to run, and qualifies for around £4k in RHI and RHPP payments over the seven years and is a proven technology that has been installed for twenty or more years in the UK.
I see you missed the bit where I mentioned new builds and the fact they don't qualify for RHI anyway.

Factor the lack of RHI in, then consider that there is no need to supply a back up heat source, thereby reducing the size and cost of the boiler, and knocking a day or 2 of plumbing and the associated costs of pipes, valve etc from the overall costs of the work, and that around 40% of the hot water demand would need to be met from gas boiler on a standard solar water heating system...

In this situation I don't see that there's going to be much in it in running cost terms, and if there is solar PV to supply most of the power, then IMO the equation is likely to come out in favor of the thermodynamic option if it's controlled to ensure most of the use is when there's excess solar PV generation.

Basically these units are just heat pumps, and should be generally more efficient on average than most ashp due to the additional heat input of the solar gain, so arguments about its suitability for water heating should apply more to ASHP than they do to the thermodynamic systems due to the higher input temperatures when solar gain applies.

Do you also believe that West Ham will win the premiership and that Santa exists ?
No, but I do understand the physics behind heat pumps.
 
No but PV manufacturers have tested products that are approved, the same with solar thermal products and heat pumps, biomass boilers and wind turbines.
Independent testing has been undertaken on all of the above products and the results are clear and verifiable.

Solar thermodynamics is the only product I know that tried to con the MCS system by "painting stripes on a horse and calling it a zebra".
It is the only product that does not publish verifiable data and COP figures from testing.
it was also the only product that MCS / DECC hadn't seen fit to create a suitable category for when they were setting all these schemes up. That isn't down to there being anything inherently wrong with the technology, it's more that it's a relatively new technology that didn't have any UK trade body representation at the time this was all getting sorted out.
 

Reply to Thermodynamic Test results - Not good in the Solar PV Forum | Solar Panels Forum area at ElectriciansForums.net

OFFICIAL SPONSORS

Electrical Goods - Electrical Tools - Brand Names Electrician Courses Green Electrical Goods PCB Way Electrical Goods - Electrical Tools - Brand Names Pushfit Wire Connectors Electric Underfloor Heating Electrician Courses
These Official Forum Sponsors May Provide Discounts to Regular Forum Members - If you would like to sponsor us then CLICK HERE and post a thread with who you are, and we'll send you some stats etc
This website was designed, optimised and is hosted by Untold Media. Operating under the name Untold Media since 2001.
Back
Top
AdBlock Detected

We get it, advertisements are annoying!

Sure, ad-blocking software does a great job at blocking ads, but it also blocks useful features of our website. For the best site experience please disable your AdBlocker.

I've Disabled AdBlock