Posted on 10/14/2014 5:01:40 AM PDT by TurboZamboni
A new financing offering could make home solar cheaper and more attractive to homeowners, and keep the adoption of home solar growing.
The offer, announced by SolarCity this week, is a loan that allows homeowners to install their own solar system on their roof for little or no money down, and pay less for electricity. Previous plans, while popular, turned off some because the solar company owned the system.
"The value proposition is becoming clearer and less complicated for consumers," says Patrick Jobin, an analyst at Credit Suisse. "Solar is going mainstream."
SolarCity's new loan deal and current similar deals that involve leases or power purchase agreements can pay off -- if you have the right roof in the right state.
For the deals to work, your roof can't be shrouded in shade and you have to be paying a relatively high price for power.
Your state also has to allow you to trade the solar power you generate but don't use for the power you need at night or when the sun isn't shining.
For that reason, the national solar companies that offer these deals, such as SolarCity, Sunrun, Sungevity and Vivint Solar, operate only in certain states, concentrated mostly in the Northeast, Southwest and West. For now, solar can't compete with the power prices and regulations in Southeast and parts of the Midwest.
(Excerpt) Read more at twincities.com ...
This really appears to be viable, regardless of your politics, in certain states where the sunlight-days work out. I don’t live in one of those. One question mark I have is whether or not these panels will actually last as long as they are “guaranteed” to last. Sunlight and weather are brutal on equipment. I have a friend in Australia whose parents _make_ 3-600 dollars a year on electricity for their home, and this includes depreciation of the equipment!
It amazes me that you can get solar cells on eBay for very little money with unimaginable output and efficiencies that could not have been built by the entire resources of NASA, DOE, and the combined military of the US/USSR at any price whatsoever 25 years ago.
In the past solar cells were notorious for failing long before their cost was recouped....I am not aware of much improvement...but I could be wrong!!
With the exception of California electricity in the southwest is comparatively cheap. Much of the energy is produced by nat. gas or nuclear and land is plentiful for transmission and distribution lines. In West Texas I pay a summer rate of $0.08745 per KWh. Solar would have to be much cheaper before it made economic sense regardless of how much sunlight can be harvested.
I really don’t understand why solar hasn’t made better penetration in the domestic water heating market south of the Mason/Dixon line. Solar water and pool heating sounds like a “ no brainer “ to me.
SolarCity made a sweat heart deal with schools in California they install the panels and the schools buy electric from them for the next 20 years.
Gee that’s about the life span of the panels what a plan wonder who was on the take on that deal?.
California rate is about 18 cents in most places by design. Gray Davis who was governor was thrown out of office after making deals to raise rates (among other things). The last 2 govs we had want the higher rates as the taxes are % percentages of the bill so the state makes more money - yet loses more as companies leave or cannot expand as the taxes are too high. Democrats really do not get capitalism.
that is the first thing I wonder on every business dealing involving government and subsidies-which politician and/or bureaucrat if getting rich off this?
I keep wondering why the AC industry hasn’t latched onto solar. By far my biggest electric cost (and that’s including an electric car!) is running the AC in summer. Since AC usage is closely related to amount of sunlight, best to cover the roof as you can with solar panels & siphon off some of that impinging energy, create a mechanical air gap to help blow away accumulating heat (via solar-powered fan), and use the gathered electricity to run the AC. Less sun = less electricity? no problem, you didn’t need that much for the AC under that condition. No buffering needed: run that equipment directly from the power as collected; again, as electricity produced reduces so does the demand. Insofar as direct powering may not be enough, at least you’re making a significant cut in grid use.
This as opposed to trying to run the minority of electricity use the most at low/no-sunlight periods, requiring more panels to inefficiently cache that with a bulky bank of expensive batteries.
The heaviest electrical load (at least in many regions) can be serviced with the simplest solar panel configuration: limited panel area, no batteries, specialized equipment with built-in cost-optimal alternate power input (to wit: no adapters into house power, only to get it mostly to that more cheaply capable of taking it directly).
“In the past solar cells were notorious for failing long before their cost was recouped....I am not aware of much improvement...but I could be wrong!!”
The cells can last a VERY long time...if they are kept from weather. There is a plastic/epoxy that is poured in that is supposed to pot them for 20-30 years, but I’d like to see a clear plastic that could survive Arizona sun for 20-30 years. There is also a “vacuum sheet” type of plastic that is melted over them, same concerns.
A guarantee is only as good as the company that backs it up. So, my concerns with a potential “business plan”: sell panels with 25-year warranties, go BK in 10 years, rinse, repeat.
“In the past solar cells were notorious for failing long before their cost was recouped....I am not aware of much improvement...but I could be wrong!!”
I’ve been working at the other end of this, efficiency...I just did LED lighting for virtually everything in my house. I can recoup my money in 5-7 years, the warranty (from Cree) is 10 years, most people believe that a well-built LED bulb with quality components (the power supply) can last 15-20 years. I’ve saved my receipts...Cree is a big company and I believe that they will still be around in 2024. Their stock is down but I believe that they are selling at Home Depot pretty close to their costs and Home Depot probably isn’t making a lot on them either, using them to get people into the store.
LED bulbs are instant-on, some are dimmable, and other than a slight difference in the red end in the spectrum are pretty close to incandescent lighting in the “soft white” class. You can pay extra (which I did in the bathroom mirror lighting) for pretty spot-on color rendition. The extra costs come from rare-earth phosphors. I stocked up on some 100-watt incandescents, but I’m not using them anymore.
The panels die in about 25 years and the get stuck with the replacement bill but we know how well the school system think.
Sounds like uncle Lou knows someone on the education board $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$.
The education system is a mega scam money pit.
The Mafia isn’t dead it just has a new name.
rooftop solar is outlawed in many areas due to cosmetic reasons.
just like the small satellite laws, all those hoa, laws, organances need a clear preemption.
Cosmetic reasons like living next to a Kennedy.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.