Replies

Solar works great for stand alone systems like my well or a small cabin with limited electricity use, but a whole house operation is a different ball game altogether.

My 2,300 sq ft all-electric home has 80% of the power provided by solar (on average 20% of my power has to be bought from the grid, most of that in the winter). That includes charging my EV for 16K miles per year (not counting the miles charged on the road during trips). Assuming a reasonable 3% inflation rate in energy costs that I'm avoiding, my entire energy project pays for itself on the 11th year. And that's without selling power to the grid (which I've been doing only 2 months, but don't count it as a given because state regulations might change and I decide to turn the grid sell feature back off).

Admittedly that's only for people in a situation that's good for solar (in the south where we get lots of sun, I spent some money making my house more energy efficient, I drive enough miles for the EV to be worth it, etc.). But I'm an exception where solar is good for a whole house operation.

I have a smaller home than yours, I have no electric vehicle, and I am probably a little further north than you are, yet my experience is quite similar. About 80% of my electrical needs are supplied by rooftop solar panels, which will pay for themselves in less than ten years.

How many KW? What did you pay for it? What latitude? I have figured with 10 to 12 kw and self-install on the cheap a 3 to 5 year payout with no sale back to the grid. However, without batteries I am still essentially 100% dependent on the grid to be there when I need it which may be nearly 100% of my demand, certainly so at night. Solar is a subsidy at best or a hedge against inflation.

At worst though it is cheating the system. You are not contributing to the maintenance of the base load capacity that you need 100% of but only 20% or more of the time. Somebody has to eventually pay all the cost of that base load capacity. Until everyone has solar to the same degree people who do have solar are depending on their neighbors to pay higher rates 100% of the time to provide the solar owner 100% of his needs 20% of the time at that higher rate. The solar owner is being carried.

Solar can reduce fuel consumption but the physical plant that burns fuel for the times when solar is either crippled or unavailable remains the same size and probably even higher cost than to depend on it 100%. Solar and wind are problems.

>my entire energy project pays for itself on the 11th year.<

The good news is it comes with a 10 year warranty.;=)

I am in a similar, yet smaller situation. I also had a wind turbine. It broke and isn’t worth the $5000 to fix it. So I am down to solar, battery, grid, and gas generator. This setup is not by choice. There was no grid available until 3 years ago.

I just replaced the batteries for 12 grand. It’s going to take the rest of my lifetime to catch up...but it’s the least I can do to save the planet for the Gretas. /spit