Paul - I only have the figures wrong because sufficient details were not given in the article.
I have derived the figures I estimated from the claimed amount of CO2 saved, which, based on the solar industry estimated saving over thermal power generation equates to 1400kWh per home. That figure is fully consistent with the stated equivalence to 500 cars, assuming a 10,000 mile usage per year at 150g/km CO2 emission.
However, if you say the output of each home will be 2060kWh, then the previous figures I gave are significant underestimates, and that means that the landlords will be making even bigger profits for themselves at the expense of other energy users.
I am a physicist and I am fully supportive of renewable energy development, BUT NOT AT ANY COST to the rest of us. Creating an artificial profit margin for the solar and wind power industries at the expense of other energy users who may not even have an option to use renewable energy is completely wrong.
If there is to be any public investment in developing new energy technology, it should be done through formally accounted public funding, whereby the publicly funded proportion of the developed technology remains in public ownership. This would ensure that the public money invested is spent for the intended purpose, and the result of that investment would be value fed back to the public account, and public money would not simply be spent on filling up the bank accounts of so-called "entrepreneurs".