UK also has massive subsidies. I know someone who got a government subsidy, the company didn't complete the job, got paid for the government for the full job, and they calculated the payback was 50+ years.
At this point, I do not understand how anyone can possibly believe that the people advocating for this stuff are thinking in terms of economic (as opposed to political or social) returns. This stuff makes no economic sense and is already bankrupting the country.
Also, there is a legal requirement for new builds to have this now, this is with a massive shortage of housing, with a government that is a government of the "people" but has just put out the same housing targets as the last one and is running 75% behind annually. The scale of subsidies being given to these industries is probably tens of billions, green energy subsidies are now 5x larger than industry profits...this makes no sense, even with sky-high electricity prices (to be clear, it is consumers who are ultimately paying for this...we pay higher prices so that a lawyer somewhere can prattle on about leading a "green revolution" that is lining the pockets of donors).
I can't speak for the UK, but ... I did my own install of a 6.7kW ground-mount array. The materials cost me about US$12k. That meant just 7-10 years until payback. Sure, I saved on labo(u)r costs, often the most expensive part of the work, but the overall point remains ... it absolutely makes sense, at least in the "right" parts of the planet.
It isn't just the "right" parts. Yes, the UK has less sun but ground mount is not happening in the UK because average dwelling size is so mall. So typically installed on roof of much smaller properties which costs significantly more for far less solar panel. Detached homes are also rarer than the US because of the issues with supply of almost all goods/services in the UK so there are more issues with tree cover. And, of course, almost all the marginal demand for solar panel is through government subsidies which adds even more cost.
Guy I spoke about above lives in a part of the UK with less sunlight, there was extensive tree cover around his property, and the job was done incorrectly (but full subsidy paid). As I said, there is wilful corruption and, therefore, it is impossible to engage with this subject on the basis of rational economic thought. Companies receiving the subsidies pretend to be doing work and politicians pretend the companies are saving the environment.
I confess to still not understanding why roof installs cost so much more.
My ground mount array(s) required concrete foundations that were 5' deep and 17" in diameter, and the frame cost $2k in iron piping. There's nothing remotely comparable in a roof install.
I guess people just charge more because "we're on your roof, which is tricky".
At this point, I do not understand how anyone can possibly believe that the people advocating for this stuff are thinking in terms of economic (as opposed to political or social) returns. This stuff makes no economic sense and is already bankrupting the country.
Also, there is a legal requirement for new builds to have this now, this is with a massive shortage of housing, with a government that is a government of the "people" but has just put out the same housing targets as the last one and is running 75% behind annually. The scale of subsidies being given to these industries is probably tens of billions, green energy subsidies are now 5x larger than industry profits...this makes no sense, even with sky-high electricity prices (to be clear, it is consumers who are ultimately paying for this...we pay higher prices so that a lawyer somewhere can prattle on about leading a "green revolution" that is lining the pockets of donors).