The Government’s proposal to mandate solar panels on all new-build homes has drawn criticism from free-market think tank the Institute of Economic Affairs (IEA), with one of its energy analysts branding the move an “ideological crusade.”
Andy Mayer, energy analyst at the IEA, argued that the decision should rest with homeowners rather than politicians.
He said: “The person most relevant to deciding what should go on a new home is the person buying it, not a Minister in the grip of an ideological crusade.
Mayer alsp cast doubt on the Government’s claim that rooftop solar could save households up to £1,000 a year.
He added: “If the Government’s claims about savings of £1,000 per household a year were credible, there would be no need for a mandate. Clearly, they are not.”
He noted that the average electricity bill for a UK household is around £881 annually – less than the touted savings – and that the actual financial return on solar panels takes much longer to materialise.
Mayer added: “Industry experts consider the payback period for rooftop solar to be between 10 to 20 years, not three.”
Beyond cost, he pointed to practical limitations, such as building orientation, shading from trees, and geographical location, which could render many homes unsuitable for solar panels.
He also questioned the climate benefit of the policy, noting that only a small portion of the housing stock is replaced each year.
He concluded: “The UK typically adds 0.5% to the housing stock each year, a number that will fall if homes are made more expensive to build
“The timing of this announcement in a week where 60 million Europeans experienced a catastrophic blackout event due to over-supply of solar on the Spanish grid shows extraordinary contempt.”
