info on solar panels

[dolfans]

Wondering if anyone knows about solar panels/power? I may talk to the wife about it soon and check into it at tax time. I know you can use it for hot water but what else? What all would be inside and where can it go in the crawl space it is maybe 3 to 5 feet tall in places. What about bad weather,cloudy etc and live in a manufauctered house. Have thought about have it not on the roof but the ground seems like that way it would get more sun bc of it being turned facing PM sun instead of late AM /PM sun(facing front of house it would be 9:00 instead of 12 unless they are side ways. Also have them where i want nobody can see them unless come into the yard. thanks

 

[Ironcrow]

You are talking about two things, solar hot water and solar photovoltaic panels. The federal tax credit is 30% the cost of installation. Solar hot water is particularly cost effective and can pay for itself in a few years. Photovoltaic systems take two or 3 time longer to pay back.

With the cost of photovoltaic panels dropping, it is usually not worth it to have the panels aim toward the sun. A few extra panels make up for the "lost" energy more effectively than the cost of the mechanism to aim the panels. Also, realize that aiming the panels means they must be placed further apart to avoid shadowing.

Solar hot water can add just the panels on the roof and feed to your existing water heater. Or it can have additional control panel with pumps and such and an extra water tank, sometimes larger than your water heater. Typical systems are less than 100 square feet of panel.

Photovoltaic systems are just the rooftop panels and an inverter, usually mounted next to your electrical panel. Typical electrical systems are about 20 panels, 300ish square feet. If you have ample land, a ground based system is certainly easy to install and easier to clean (you wipe the panels down a couple times per year).

 

[Ironcrow]

I should add that hot water system either automatically drain during freezing weather or run antifreeze in the heater and have a heat exchanger to heat you domestic water.

Also, photovoltaic PV systems are eerily "grid tied" meaning you are still hooked up to the utility for cloudy/snowy days.

 

[Dick in Wisconsin]

You need to look at the cost of energy that you're paying now. The cost of electricity and NG can vary from area to area. Municipal utilities provide electricity, if well run and many are, provide electricity at pretty low rates which then makes the rate of return and payback on solar decades.

Everytime I've looked at solar (both solar hot water and solar photovoltaic panels) the payback just isn't there (at least in Wisconsin it isn't). But in states like Florida and say Arizona where I understand electricity is expensive, then solar hot water starts to make sense. But before you get to excited about solar hot water in FL and AZ, check out a heat pump water heater. Takes the heat out of say the garage and makes hot water which then cools your garage.

If you're heating hot water with natural gas and the price is reason, it will take decades to get a decent payback on solar. If you're heating hot water with electricity (and use LOTS of it) and the cost of electricity is high, then solar could make sense for you.

 

[dogdog]

It's not worth it yet as far as replacing it for your current house hold electricity use... definitely don't get suckered into those Free Solar deals..... no matter what crazy free installation they talk you into, I think few ppl here had those installation from solar city or something alike and didn't like it......

Do look into if your state / City have any rebates and tax breaks into multi years but that is after you fork over about $40K up front..... even with that my friend that did the rebate and installation have a calculated ROI about 5 years and that is probably an optimistic pipe dreams, last time I did the calculation it is 15 years before ROI for me.... but here it cost average about $10 / watt maybe $15.... price changes dependent on the panel prices.....

It's a Federal rebate programs but it is administrated by the state... I think... for NY it's nyserda not sure about your state.....but it does have some links to give you some figures on ROI etc base on your past 1 year electricity usage. so still a good site to visit if you are serious about solar.

http://www.nyserda.ny.gov/

 

[Ironcrow]

Here's a website that rates North Carolina above Arizona for solar ROI:
http://cleantechnica.com/2013/11/08/solar-worth/

In the end, as this website concludes, the decision to install solar is a personal one. You have to pencil your situation, location, equipment, and decide what is important to you. Is it only about the money? Then you look very closely at payback and ROI. For me, I just wanted solar power. Bought it, not leased. I like energy security and being green. And I HAVE NO POWER BILL anymore. Years to payback? Don't know. Didn't calculate it. Don't care. Not everybody approaches the problem the same way.

 

[kd3pc]

When calculating ROI, I have yet to see a factor in the process to account for the fact that there has never been a decrease in the price of a KwH of power (at least in the states I have lived) in the past 40 years, that I can recall.

I would suggest an annual price increase factor of 2-3% (or more per KwH) when looking at ROI.

 

[nadogail]

What worked for me may not work for another.

I had a discussion with my accountant / tax preparer; in my particular situation the federal tax credits have no value.

I chose a Power Purchase Agreement, where I buy my electricity from the solar company for the Tier One price per KWH, 14.something cents. This agreement locks in the price for 20 years. When I bought from San Diego Gas & Electric, the tier 2,3,&4 prices would make you wince, my $350 average bill has been cut to $125.

My payback is less than two years.

I am sure the solar company is making money on this deal, but that is why they are in business.

 

[toplessHO]

When calculating ROI, I have yet to see a factor in the process to account for the fact that there has never been a decrease in the price of a KwH of power (at least in the states I have lived) in the past 40 years, that I can recall.

I would suggest an annual price increase factor of 2-3% (or more per KwH) when looking at ROI.

I would say that the 2-3% factor would be a good number to put back for
future replacement/maintenance of the solar system

 

[Ironcrow]

I may talk to the wife about it soon and check into it at tax time.

By the way, the 30% federal tax credit is set to expire at the end of 2016. What happens after that is no known. May go away? Be reduced? Chances are that the tax credit will not increase. If you decide to pull the trigger, do it before the end of 2016.

 

[Professur]

There's full grid tie, and there's supported grid tie with batteries. Grid tie is you're selling all your power to the utility for a credit against what you use. You need to contact your utility to see what availability and rates they offer. Ontario offered great buy pricing .. but after people got their installs done, they claimed the grid in that area couldn't accept them. A full grid tie is the cheapest .. but when the grid is down, so are you. Also, since you're backfeeding the grid, you have to have a preventer that blocks your power from getting to the grid while they're fixing it. But you don't have the expense of batteries, which age and expire.

Quebec will allow a grid tie, but offer no premiums for crediting your generation, and credits expire in 2 years ... so there's no way to improve your return on investment at all. Really *****, as I've got a full southern exposure to generate with. Best I can do is zero out consumption, and still have to pay grid fees.

 

[larry4406]

... Best I can do is zero out consumption, and still have to pay grid fees.

Go off grid if you have the ability

 

[Professur]

Many places won't let you. They'll declare the house unfit if it's not attached to taxable services. I've heard of several cases where preppers in the states have run afoul of this .. even to the point of having their children seized. Before making the attempt, it's best to run the scenario past the powers that be in your local. If you phrase it as an environmental venture as opposed to getting away from paying you stand a better chance.

At my parents' cottage they have a 1200g holding tank and maybe run a gallon or two of water into it over a weekend. The municipality still requires that we have it pumped out every 2 years and present the receipt for service. If not, they'll send the tanker and add it to our tax bill.

 

[Falcon67]

As noted above, depends on rate of return for your area. Power is cheap here, lots of sun but ROI even with federal rebate is nearly the life of the panels.

 

[HoosierBuddy]

A point touched on by a couple of posters above, solar efficiency and ultimately payback are going to depend on the Latitude of the location. The further north your location is (at least in the Northern hemisphere) the greater the installed PV panels will have to be for the same daily power output over the year...so payback may be tougher.

Of course if your power is cheap or expensive that affects payback regardless of Latitude.

Further, don't be too quick to decide against grid-tied systems. In theory, they would allow a lower capital expenditure and greater power usage flexibility. You'd just have to run the numbers for your individual circumstance and see what makes sense. The "greenies" have been very vocal in getting state's to approve net-metering strategies because they recognize this is a valuable tool for consumers to get into solar without "eating the whole elephant". If it were up to the power companies, I don't think many would want net metering if it wasn't forced on them. From their standpoint, they have all the installation costs, all the maintenance costs, all the generation costs, and are just getting less revenue. That's in the solar customers' favor, at least for now, so might as well take advantage of it if it makes sense for you numbers-wise.


Phil

 

[LutzTD]

when I did ROI even here in Florida it was not cost effective. Basically by purchasing the Solar power system Im buying 20 years of electricity now. If the cells dont last 20 years, Im out, If I move, Im out. If a hurricane damages them, Im out. The power company also do not pay you as much for electricty as they charge, so the grid tie is not one to one. If you dont want to grid tie then you have to either get a battery bank or you lose your excess power capacity and pay for your nights. If ou grid tie, you have to carry insurance as well, which is a cost adder and an unpredictable expense.

My monthly power bill averages out to around $200/month so Im not a big user anyway. If I were to do solar I would keep my system small enough for my needs with a small battery bank for a little excess stand by, maybe buy a plug in electric car to take some excess, but even that has diminishing returns due to cell failures and such.

If the cost gets down to around 5-7 years then I may roll the dice, but at 20yr break even Im not the least interested.

Its too bad, because I purposely built my shop to have a reinforced 42x42 rooftop with an 18 degree southern exposure for solar.

 

[LutzTD]

A point touched on by a couple of posters above, solar efficiency and ultimately payback are going to depend on the Latitude of the location. The further north your location is (at least in the Northern hemisphere) the greater the installed PV panels will have to be for the same daily power output over the year...so payback may be tougher.

Of course if your power is cheap or expensive that affects payback regardless of Latitude.

Further, don't be too quick to decide against grid-tied systems. In theory, they would allow a lower capital expenditure and greater power usage flexibility. You'd just have to run the numbers for your individual circumstance and see what makes sense. The "greenies" have been very vocal in getting state's to approve net-metering strategies because they recognize this is a valuable tool for consumers to get into solar without "eating the whole elephant". If it were up to the power companies, I don't think many would want net metering if it wasn't forced on them. From their standpoint, they have all the installation costs, all the maintenance costs, all the generation costs, and are just getting less revenue. That's in the solar customers' favor, at least for now, so might as well take advantage of it if it makes sense for you numbers-wise.


Phil

the power companies do get some benefit. By buying solar at a distance from the generation sites, the net cost of the power is cheaper for them. The power co's biggest cost is transmission loss. By getting and selling the power local, they get the power cheaper than they can make it and transmit it so it is a net gain for them. But I do agree it adds a certain amount of risk for them as well, since the net meter needs to be sophisticated and reliable enough that it doesnt do damaging things to the grid in general.

 

[DC73]

When calculating ROI, I have yet to see a factor in the process to account for the fact that there has never been a decrease in the price of a KwH of power (at least in the states I have lived) in the past 40 years, that I can recall.

I would suggest an annual price increase factor of 2-3% (or more per KwH) when looking at ROI.

Depends on the fuel required by the generating plant. Fuel can account for as much as 75% of the electric bill. Generally, PoCos don't make any money on the fuel, they just pass along the actual cost. Where natural gas is the predominant fuel for generation, there have been many instances over the past 3 decades of tremendous price drops (and some increases as well). The price of natural gas can be volatile and often depends on the severity of winters in the northeast. At one time the cost of natural gas to power plant operators was at least 7x what it is today. Coal fire generation is more stable as there are long term contracts and a more known quantity of coal which means transportation of the coal is the driving cost behind price changes. Hydro and nuclear power are also more price stable than natural gas.

Around here, the cost of power is reasonable and solar installations rarely have a reasonable payback. That should change as new technologies make solar cells more efficient and cheaper to produce.

DC