Posted by: @toodles

↑

---

Whilst cleaning some very dusty and dirty solar panels this morning, I got to thinking…

Q. Why are solar panels covered with a grid pattern?

A. To provide the pigeons with a more challenging target area.

I am trying, so far unsuccessfully, to get an answer to the simple question namely is it legal (given the hosepipe ban) to use a hose to clean ones own solar panels. 

Affinity water have confirmed that it is legal for someone to do this as a business, but have not answered the question about DiY.  The actual legal notice would suggest that it is legal, unless solar panels are an artificial outdoor surface.  Obviously mathematically solar panels are a 'surface' but I would personally say that they are not a 'surface' in the way normally meant in the context of building.

The precise definition is

(k) Cleaning other artificial outdoor surfaces using a hosepipe

“Artificial outdoor surface” means any of the following:
a) any area outdoors which is paved or laid with hard or artificial material;
b) timber decking;
c) a quay;
d) a trailer designed, constructed or adapted to launch boats or other vessels or craft into water, other than a private motor-vehicle;
e) the roof of any domestic premises. “Quay” includes jetty, pontoon, wharf and slipway.

Interpretation: It is interpreted to include the cleaning by hosepipe of all exterior surfaces, by domestic customers. This includes driveways (both domestic and non -domestic); and marine infrastructure such as pontoons and slipways, whether fixed permanently in position or floating
.

@jamespa Normally, we have rainwater in our water butts and I use this (much softer than our mains water and fewer ‘additional’ trace elements I suspect); however, at present, I have had to resort to mains water (for the first time ever), to clean the panels. I still do not understand the reasoning but, as a registered blind person, Thames Water gave me dispensation to use a hose pipe still. Regards, Toodles. (Come on Rain Dancers, do your stuff, or maybe we should appoint a new Minister for Drought!

Posted by: @jamespa

↑

Posted by: @toodles

↑

---

Whilst cleaning some very dusty and dirty solar panels this morning, I got to thinking…

Q. Why are solar panels covered with a grid pattern?

A. To provide the pigeons with a more challenging target area.

I am trying, so far unsuccessfully, to get an answer to the simple question namely is it legal (given the hosepipe ban) to use a hose to clean ones own solar panels. 

Affinity water have confirmed that it is legal for someone to do this as a business, but have not answered the question about DiY.  The actual legal notice would suggest that it is legal, unless solar panels are an artificial outdoor surface.  Obviously mathematically solar panels are a 'surface' but I would personally say that they are not a 'surface' in the way normally meant in the context of building.

 

The precise definition is

 

(k) Cleaning other artificial outdoor surfaces using a hosepipe

“Artificial outdoor surface” means any of the following:
a) any area outdoors which is paved or laid with hard or artificial material;
b) timber decking;
c) a quay;
d) a trailer designed, constructed or adapted to launch boats or other vessels or craft into water, other than a private motor-vehicle;
e) the roof of any domestic premises. “Quay” includes jetty, pontoon, wharf and slipway.

Interpretation: It is interpreted to include the cleaning by hosepipe of all exterior surfaces, by domestic customers. This includes driveways (both domestic and non -domestic); and marine infrastructure such as pontoons and slipways, whether fixed permanently in position or floating.

Given they are flat and called "panels", they are artificial, outdoor and, mounted as they are, form part of a roof, I find it very difficult to see how any court ruling (the logical conclusion of any dispute on this subject) would accept any argument suggesting they aren't artificial outdoor surfaces, especially since they don't need to be cleaned during a drought. I can understand that panels on shallow sloped roofs may suffer more from settled dust and detritus than more steeply angled ones but cleaning them is still an ideal rather than an essential.

Posted by: @toodles

↑

@jamespa Normally, we have rainwater in our water butts and I use this (much softer than our mains water and fewer ‘additional’ trace elements I suspect); however, at present, I have had to resort to mains water (for the first time ever), to clean the panels. I still do not understand the reasoning but, as a registered blind person, Thames Water gave me dispensation to use a hose pipe still. Regards, Toodles. (Come on Rain Dancers, do your stuff, or maybe we should appoint a new Minister for Drought!

@toodles, you are definitely the exception to prove the rule. We have water butts too, and if we were to choose to wash our solar panels then we'd most likely use water from those butts, having the added benefit that runoff from the washing would collect in the gutters and run back into the same butts. Not possible, of course, for you with panels on the ground.

Plenty of butts 'round 'ere

but

@transparent I’ve heard that that is why American cars have bigger seats.😉

Posted by: @majordennisbloodnok

↑

Given they are flat and called "panels", they are artificial, outdoor and, mounted as they are, form part of a roof, I find it very difficult to see how any court ruling (the logical conclusion of any dispute on this subject) would accept any argument suggesting they aren't artificial outdoor surfaces,

... except that the legal notice (part of which was reproduced above) gives a definition of surface which couldn't by any stretch include solar panels except in roof panels that are themselves the actual roof as opposed to being mounted on the roof.

Posted by: @majordennisbloodnok

↑

especially since they don't need to be cleaned during a drought.

Except that many, many of the exceptions that are explicitly made in the temporary use ban don't need to be done either!  For example watering almost anything through a drip feed system (something that in the case of domestic customers will apply principally to the more wealthy individuals only).  Furthermore if the argument that solar panels don't need to be cleaned is relevant, why are people allowed to use a hosepipe to clean them for others (which Affinity Water confirm is legitimate)

I'm not debating the morality, I'm debating the legitimacy given the actual wording.

Posted by: @jamespa

↑

Posted by: @majordennisbloodnok

↑

Given they are flat and called "panels", they are artificial, outdoor and, mounted as they are, form part of a roof, I find it very difficult to see how any court ruling (the logical conclusion of any dispute on this subject) would accept any argument suggesting they aren't artificial outdoor surfaces,

... except that the legal notice (part of which was reproduced above) gives a definition of surface which couldn't by any stretch include solar panels except in roof panels that are themselves the actual roof as opposed to being mounted on the roof.

I'm afraid I disagree. I don't think it's a stretch at all, for several reasons.

Firstly, the list within the definition is clearly not exhaustive and would, I believe, be seen in that light if ever scrutinised in court. For instance, decking made from recycled plastic faux timber would, I'm sure, be treated just like timber decking. Similarly, whilst "quay" is said to include jetty, pontoon, wharf and slipway, I find it hard to imagine a pier would be treated differently. In other words, even though solar panels attached to a roof are not explicitly mentioned I think one would be hard pressed to argue they're not part of the roof. 

Secondly, it's very well known that, when selling a house, anything screwed or bolted to the building is seen as part of the building itself unless explicitly excluded. Solar panels aren't fixed in a temporary sort of way; they're properly and securely bolted on. As such, once again, I think it would be an uphill struggle to argue they're not part of the roof for the purposes of this legal notice.

Thirdly, I personally would have a very hard time cleaning my roof-mounted solar panels with a hose without at the same time cleaning the roof (de facto, with a hose). It would be just like trying to clean the chimney but not the roof (and chimneys aren't explicitly mentioned either).

Fourthly, the definitions clearly include any area outdoors which is paved or laid with a hard or artificial material. A roof is an outdoor area and mine is laid with hard, artificial solar panels.

It is, of course, possible I'm wrong on all counts. However, given I've come up with so many reasonably arguable points I do disagree that including solar panels is much of a stretch at all.

Posted by: @jamespa

↑

Posted by: @majordennisbloodnok

↑

especially since they don't need to be cleaned during a drought.

Except that many, many of the exceptions that are explicitly made in the temporary use ban don't need to be done either!  For example watering almost anything through a drip feed system (something that in the case of domestic customers will apply principally to the more wealthy individuals only).  Furthermore if the argument that solar panels don't need to be cleaned is relevant, why are people allowed to use a hosepipe to clean them for others (which Affinity Water confirm is legitimate)

I'm not debating the morality, I'm debating the legitimacy given the actual wording.

Don't get me wrong, @jamespa; I'm not getting into the morals either, and I'm certainly not going to defend water companies that have consistently failed to keep their houses in order. However, the legislation allowing them to impose emergency restrictions is there for a reason and if you or I were taken to court then the court would already recognise the legitimacy of what the water company is trying to achieve. You or I would have to be arguing a case for doing something unnecessary in the face of a real and recognised necessity for conserving water.

As for drip feeding and so forth, it has been stated many times in lots of places that the restriction is on the hosepipe, not the water, since most uses of a hosepipe are not well targeted and so are wasteful. Where a hosepipe is used to feed an efficient and targeted system, generally that's allowed under the exclusions; drip feeders, soaker hoses, even filling watering cans with a hose so you can water by hand without keeping walking back to the tap. The distinction between unnecessary and reasonably use is also made where Affinity state (with provisos) that an exception is the watering of food crops at domestic premises or private allotments.

As for why it is allowed for businesses to offer cleaning services using water whilst prohibiting people from doing the job themselves, I'm with you; I don't like it. I'm sure the arguments are that it would be an unreasonable pressure on someone's livelihood and that, with it being a chargeable service, there's a degree of rationing being imposed anyway. However, I've never heard of any restrictions imposed on commercial water-using companies to amend how they use and/or recycle the water. If there are such requirements going on in parallel, I'd be far happier.

I just had to check the Topic Title.

It's funny to see such a serious debate here without even a pun in sight.  🤔 

Posted by: @transparent

↑

I just had to check the Topic Title.

It's funny to see such a serious debate here without even a pun in sight.  🤔 

You're quite right, @transparent. It's usually me derailing a serious topic with a bad joke and here I am derailing a fun topic in the opposite direction....

@jamespa, would you be offended if I blew an e-raspberry in your direction and expected a virtual custard pie flying back in return? I'm sure we should be able to lower the tone if we put our heads together.

@majordennisbloodnok Would that get us back to current affairs? Perhaps this is something others would discuss in bars but don’t feel I am putting you under any pressure.

Posted by: @majordennisbloodnok

↑

@jamespa, would you be offended if I blew an e-raspberry in your direction and expected a virtual custard pie flying back in return? I'm sure we should be able to lower the tone if we put our heads together.

I would expect nothing less and would not be offended.