Posted on 05/19/2015 4:42:18 AM PDT by thackney
Most people buy rooftop solar panels because they think it will save them money or make them green, or both. But the truth is that rooftop solar shouldn’t be saving them money (though it often does), and it almost certainly isn’t green. In fact, the rooftop-solar craze is wasting billions of dollars a year that could be spent on greener initiatives. It also is hindering the growth of much more cost-effective renewable sources of power.
According to a recent Energy Department-backed study at North Carolina State University, installing a fully financed, average-size rooftop solar system will reduce energy costs for 93% of the single-family households in the 50 largest American cities today. That’s why people have been rushing out to buy rooftop solar panels, particularly in sunny states like Arizona, California and New Mexico.
The primary reason these small solar systems are cost-effective, however, is that they’re heavily subsidized. Utilities are forced by law to purchase solar power generated from the rooftops of homeowners and businesses at two to three times more than it would cost to buy solar power from large, independently run solar plants. Without subsidies, rooftop solar isn’t close to cost-effective.
Recent studies by Lazard and others, however, have found that large, utility-scale solar power plants can cost as little as five cents (or six cents without a subsidy) per kilowatt-hour to build and operate in the sunny Southwest. These plants are competitive with similarly sized fossil-fueled power plants. But this efficiency is possible only if solar plants are large and located in sunny parts of the country. On average, utility-scale solar plants nationwide still cost about 13 cents per kilowatt-hour, versus around six cents per kilowatt-hour for coal and natural gas, according to the Lazard study.
(Excerpt) Read more at wsj.com ...
Not that you shouldn’t disconnect when running your generator, it absolutely should be disconnected, but, if it were connected, your generator would immediately sync with the grid.
I think group 24 is about equivalent to 100 amp-hrs. It’s something like the second largest size of common deep cycle battery.
You don’t need solar panels for that - you need batteries.
Solar or gas powered generators can be used to provide some charge on your batteries.
Would a house buyer pay much extra for a preexisting solar system, especially one beat up by the elements for a few years? Possibly the real life resale value of a $42,000 installed solar system is around $2,000. A buyer with any architectural taste would give it a negative value.
Any mention on what happens after a really bad hail storm?
We have two generators. One is 12 volt output for charging. Generators need gas. Good supplement but the solar just works with no noise.
Your second sentence contradicts your first.
What does your set up consist of?
Utility natural gas generator to run like a submarine -
during the day, the noise won’t be as noticeable,
then run off the batteries at night (that were charged during the “surface” time).
Due to the nature of the natural gas system,
it can run unattended for years.
Don’t confuse us with economics, there’s a planet to be saved here. /s
Great and efficient system if there’s a gas supply (not applicable here) and the gas keeps flowing.
Gas continuing to flow, I’ve been assured through studies, is not an immediate concern.
But, if you’re far enough afield to not have utility gas, your “pig” will eventually run out. You can store a LOT of LP in one of those, though.
If you have an old bill from when the electric company supplied ALL your power the solar HW pre-heater saves about 10% (I assume it’s a pre-heater and you still have the regular HW heater. AW full duty solar HW heater would save about 15%). It would be a greater proportion after installing the panels of course.
I’m curious what the payback period is for the solar HW heater including installation
Now we haven't had everything in place for a year so we're waiting for a full year of everything. That will happen next Jan because this past Jan they did the PV installation.
Duke electric bills are a nightmare to try to read and interpret so it is hard to say what portions of the whole system have contributed what to the drop. If I had done it one year at a time, AC first, then a year later HW, then a year PV I probably would have been able to see what each part contributed to the overall bill.
Overall I did a rough calculation that based on the drop in the bill and the rebates it will break even between 7 and 8 years unless Duke increases rates (which I'm sure isn't likely <'/s>).
Finally, I believe that the subsidies prop up the manufacturers' prices and if they stopped the subsidies the prices would drop correspondingly because the greenies have installed what they are going to install and the rest of us wont install them if they are too costly. I only did it because I had the money and moving closer to retirement and watching the elec market in FL I believed that the payback pd was reasonable and I wanted to get rid of a monthly payment that was only increasing.
When my roof was being repaired from severe hail damage I was approached by a vendor to put panels on my roof. I just stared at him...
Seen one day of sun in the last two weeks. And I am in Southern Texas.
When my roof was being repaired from severe hail damage I was approached by a vendor to put panels on my roof. I just stared at him...
Seen one day of sun in the last two weeks. And I am in Southern Texas.
What was the normal holding period? You left that out.
” electric bills are a nightmare to try to read and interpret so it is hard to say what portions of the whole system have contributed what to the drop. “
For two to four people just take the total bill and apportion it thus:
‘44% Heating and Cooling
33% Lighting and Appliances
14% Water Heating
9% Refrigerator ‘
Those numbers give a 7 year subsdized payback period for your HW heater (10 year unsubsidized).
$42/mo savings from HW heater; $66/mo from the 50% reduction in cooling costs (less annualized over the winter).
A longer payback than I’d risk, but reasonable.
I don’t think you’d see so much of a reduction in price without the subsidy, they have to make a profit.
Good info.
I agree they have to make a profit but, a friend of mine who was looking at having a system installed, all the installers calculated everything based on the rebates he would receive. He decided to become certified to install and installed his own system and dramatically cut the price of everything. I look at like the Chevy volt, it is essentially the same platform as the Malibu which is like more than 10 grand less, they sell it based on the subsidies. I believe the price is built on the subsidy. If the subidy went away I doubt the price would be that much higher than a Malibu.
You do not believe their is significant cost in the electric batteries, inverter and motors, along with the associated controls?
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.