# Who here has a solar energy system?



## Nealtw

If anyone answers this could be an interesting read so Bump.


----------



## CodeMatters

Until recently Ontario had a lucrative program where solar roof top
was purchased by the grid at a rate several times higher than the
consumption rate. If the new conservative government run by Rob 
Fords* brother hasn't stopped signing new contracts, I'm sure they
will soon.

For myself, I've been meaning for years now to build a simple pop can 
solar heater.....but still haven't -(


*Rob Ford was TO's crack smoking mayor who made international 
news with his antics.


----------



## Deja-vue

I got a 11.5 KWh System. 44 Panels. 
My Electricity Bill before: $275 - $320 a month
My Electricity Bill now: $10.

Two or three times a year, I get a Check for $170-$220 from Edison.
(Our Utility company here)

I produce way more than I use. I prepped for using an ECar soon, but haven't bought one just yet.

Basically, they pay us here 3 Cents per KWh, and sell it for 17, 25, 35 or 45 Cents per KWh. A Joke.
I don't care. Since mine was a 100% DIY Setup, my System will have paid for itself in August 2020. Soon after I'll get a Tesla Wall or LG Chem Home Battery.
Regret is that I didn't do it a couple of years before.

Small Drone Video of my complete System:


----------



## SPS-1

I am thinking about putting in a system. Ontario used to pay generously for PV power, but now they only credit your account to a maximum of total electricity usage goes to zero for a year. But you still a monthly charge to be hooked up to the grid (fair enough).
I only use about 5600 kWhr per year, so its tough to justify just on economics. Probably, I would go for about 5 or 6 kW system. But if I can use solar as emergency back-up, it helps to justify the investment. Being able to use one's expensive solar system if the grid goes down seems to actually be quite challenging without a battery system. However, SMA does make an inverter that has an emergency 1.5 kW (I think the newer ones may be 2 kW) output. Not a heck of a lot of power, but if the grid goes down for a few days, I am sure I would be very grateful for anything I can get. But of course, need to hope for some sunshine. 
When Ontario was paying generously for PV power, installers were popping up everywhere, like weeds. Now, a lot have died off.


----------



## Deja-vue

> SMA does make an inverter that has an emergency 1.5 kW


Yes, I got two of those. And the new ones do provide 2kW if the Grid goes down, provided you have Sun.
:wink2:


----------



## Deja-vue

Picture for SPS-1:


----------



## Dave Sal

That's really a sweet system you have there Deja-vue.


----------



## viper

Deja-vue said:


> Picture for SPS-1:


Deja, could you provide some more specs of your system? What size are the panels? sqft or sqM total? And do you by chance log the kw being generated over time? Like how much is generated at different hours of the day? 

It does appear you have a pretty low pitch roof? That would certainly help get better performance! 

I know what you are saying about the "buy rate" but at least you get a check. A lot of parts of the country won't cut a check anymore and will only allow you to "bank KWHs" and I can certainly see where a battery system would be a wise investment at those electric rates!! WOW! 

Power companies will be further increasing rates in coming years as solar tech improves.


----------



## Deja-vue

Viper, here is what I got:

Panels:

9 x Trina TSM260-PA05.08

2 x LG Electronics Inc LG260S1C-A3

12 x Yingli YL250P-29b

21 x Kyocera USA KD 250GX-LFB2 (UL) (06/2012)
They are all 65x39 inches.
All Panels are 260 Watts.
Inverters are :
SMA Sunnyboy 5000TL-US22
SMA Sunnyboy 6000TL-US22

The Roof is unfortunately not facing South, but East and West.
And yes, it is a very low pitch Roof, normal for this Area.


----------



## Deja-vue

Ok, here is the Power usage, or lack of:

Monthly:


----------



## Deja-vue

And the hourly usage:


----------



## Deja-vue

In June or July, the monthly average is -750 KWh or more.

Here is my total 2017 production:


----------



## viper

Deja-vue said:


> In June or July, the monthly average is -750 KWh or more.
> 
> Here is my total 2017 production:


Confused here, you mention 750 KWH, but the graph shows 1750-ish. Was that a typo? 

Also, is this isolated production from just the PV system? I see a couple graphs that seem to be from the power co, in which it would be hard to determine how much the PV system is doing since the house usage is on there. So pretty much net use. 

If I look at the system and consider a general 15% eff on the PV panels, all the numbers look rather close. Do you know what efficiency the inverters run at? I think 90% was typically a safe value but I know they will be pushing that with lower resistance components and even better power factor. 

Reading actual KWh from the inverters to the grid is probably going to give the most accurate total system numbers. 

It will also be interesting to monitor performance trends over the years to determine how much it declines. Not something folks think about but they will degrade a bit. But heck, at your electric rates, it will make sense to change them out in 8yrs for sure!


----------



## Deja-vue

Viper, the 1750 KWh is total production. I used that month 1000 KWh or so, the rest goes to the Electric Company.
The Inverters run at 95% + efficiency.
To measure performance trends, you probably need about 10 years of usage.
We had some really hard Rain here in SoCal in early 2018, and I won't make in total production what I did in 2017. There were also a lot of morning clouds in 2018, but I'm still hoping for a close even run this year.
I'd be looking at a total of 40 MWh's produced since February of 2016.
Now that is pretty cool.
The coolest thing is, of course :
1. No more electricity Bill.
2. Helping the environment.
Cheers,


----------



## viper

Can you share how your power co charges for power and how the rates work? It appears your rates are insane high and not sure why. I know things in CA cost more but wow! 

Here, we have about 2 basic rates in peak season. I guess what people don't know is there is going to be lots of things changing regarding the grid, power companies, rates, etc , etc as more and more people install solar. I think lots of people assume the power company is excited to buy power. Well, if they can nearly steal it from you, but as a whole, All these solar systems are hurting their bottom line! Imagine that, lol!

What royally irritates me is these power companies rave about how they are going green, saving the world for us, etc ,etc. They install all these green generation products, then they can prob the corporation commissions for a rate hike to "pay for it all"..... 

We are messing around with some tech here but the issue is primarily scale. Our stuff is WAY more efficient but not very feasible for a roof top and primarily designed for larger scale installations. Talking MW. 

One thing is for sure, different parts of the country can require different approaches to this stuff! Here in the midwest, we can get tornadic winds, large hail, snow, ice, you name it.


----------



## SPS-1

Deja-Vue, what flashing system did you use to mount the panels to your roof?


----------



## Deja-vue

SPS-1 said:


> Deja-Vue, what flashing system did you use to mount the panels to your roof?


Check out their mounting System.

https://www.solarclam-p.com/blank-cjg9


----------



## Deja-vue

viper said:


> Can you share how your power co charges for power and how the rates work? It appears your rates are insane high and not sure why. I know things in CA cost more but wow!


Edison (our power company) charges on a tiered plan:

It goes up to tier 5 (55c per KWh) i believe.


----------



## user_12345a

SPS-1 said:


> I am thinking about putting in a system. Ontario used to pay generously for PV power, but now they only credit your account to a maximum of total electricity usage goes to zero for a year. But you still a monthly charge to be hooked up to the grid (fair enough).
> I only use about 5600 kWhr per year, so its tough to justify just on economics. Probably, I would go for about 5 or 6 kW system. But if I can use solar as emergency back-up, it helps to justify the investment. Being able to use one's expensive solar system if the grid goes down seems to actually be quite challenging without a battery system. However, SMA does make an inverter that has an emergency 1.5 kW (I think the newer ones may be 2 kW) output. Not a heck of a lot of power, but if the grid goes down for a few days, I am sure I would be very grateful for anything I can get. But of course, need to hope for some sunshine.
> When Ontario was paying generously for PV power, installers were popping up everywhere, like weeds. Now, a lot have died off.


You would be better off with a backup generator to run essentials.

Solar with no batteries is silly especially now that they aren't signing more contracts to pay huge sums of money for useless intermittent power. 

Without storage solar is of no value and can't be justified except for a few hot days each summer if you have a/c and don't want to buy on-peak power to run it. 


Electricity use is low compared to gas for heating and hot water which can make up 70%+ of total energy use. 

You would be better off putting solar thermal panels than pv, and it would still be a drop in the bucket with no economic justification unless the cost of natural gas skyrockets.


----------



## Deja-vue

user_12345a said:


> Without storage solar is of no value and can't be justified except for a few hot days each summer if you have a/c and don't want to buy on-peak power to run it.


I beg your pardon?

My Electricity Bill before Solar: Between $245 and $320 a Month.
My Bill after Solar: $10. (connection fee)

Also, the Power company paid me over $500 back in 2017.
You obviously have no Idea what you are talking about.


----------



## user_12345a

I'm talking about ontario, canada.

sps-1 is from ontario as am I.

The equipment costs a lot upfront, now the best you can do is spin back the meter. No fancy subsidies any more.

Ontario doesn't get the same amount of sun as california. 1kw installed may give only like 3.5 kwh per day on average.

Even when there was a large subsidy, it was just a cash generator -> the panels were on a separate meter and the money was given at the expense rate payers. They were giving away like 40 to 80 cents per kwh of solar power generated.

Except for a few hot days each year (we don't get that many super hot days), peak demand doesn't coincide with peak solar output. 

Solar electric is of little value when it comes to actually replacing fossil fuel peaker power plants in the northeast. Due to being too passive and unreliable, non dispatchable, the power put on to the grid by solar is just surplus, exported at a loss. The conventional plants need to continue generating the same amount of electricity regardless of how much wind/solar output there is.

Now maybe in a dry desert climate, direct pv with no storage makes sense.


----------



## Deja-vue

You keep mentioning "hot Days". Heat is actually bad for Solar panels, they produce less when it is 36 Celsius vs 26 Celsius. They do, however function and produce power even on a cloudy or overcast Day.
Why do you think Germany is number one in Solar production world wide? They have many rainy days, and the overcast in Nov-March is awful.
Yet, they have more Sun hours than we have in SoCal, I see every Day how much Juice they produce.
But whatever, you do whatever you have to do. Just don't post fiction, post FACTS.
I urge Folks to do their own Research, and don't listen to user_12345 whatever posts.


----------



## SPS-1

user_12345a said:


> The conventional plants need to continue generating the same amount of electricity regardless of how much wind/solar output there is.



Not at all true. Only the nuclear plants are kept running at a constant rate. Total electrical output changes constantly. You can see the generation and demand in real time here: http://www.ieso.ca/ The "solar" generation shown is only solar farms --- they can not readily measure the rooftop outputs that slow or reverse your meter. Mostly its natural gas plants that are increased and deceased in output to balance supply and demand. Also they can easily increase or decrease hydroelectric generation --- but its cheap so they like to keep hydroelectric output relatively high.


----------



## user_12345a

^Correct. 

My point is that wind and solar are so unreliable, they can't be depended on to meet peak or base load demand.

Yes, of course the power output of gas fired plants varies to meet demand. No amount of installed solar will allow the fossil plants to lower their output.

Grid connected solar panels are passive devices. They ieso has zero control over them, they can't be dispatched and depended on meet demand. 


Have an area go cloudy unexpectedly for 2 minutes and the output plummets. The output can vary much faster than the intervals fossil fuel power plants are adjusted by.

So the fossil fuel plants can't reduce their output in response to solar output, *the same amount of fuel gets burned and the same amount of pollution gets put into the atmosphere.

This was what was ment by "same amount".*

Wind turbines are the same.

While the power is produced and put on the grid, it's too unstable to be of any value.

Now, if the solar was installed with batteries and a charge controller that could be controlled and monitored by the ieso, the power could be dispatched, solar would be of some use. 

But the cost would be astronomical, so we don't do it.

People can feel good about putting solar panels on their roofs with no batteries, but in the grand scheme of things at best grid connected solar it's a financial scam...

The power sold to the grid must be gotten rid of but isn't of any value what so ever most of the time.

Even in a net metering application, while it may spin back the meter, it doesn't offset the energy use for real. 

On paper, you "buy back" the power you put on the grid, but in reality, you're just buying conventional power when you need it and what's produced by the panels and exported to the grid never gets properly utilized.

The rate-payers cover the cost. 

A grid tied solar pv system is a toy for an the rich man, who can use it to alleviate guilt and get richer off of poor people who can't afford the panels but pay more on their hydro bills as a result of their use.

In ontario, the power produced by wind and solar is mostly exported at a loss even during peak demand periods. 

Even if all this wasn't true, with the exception of a few really hot days per year, maximum solar output doesn't coincide with peak demand. Peak is usually from like 4pm to 8pm, just as the output from solar panel declines.

To have any benefit from a grid tied system at all, the day is perfectly clear, not a cloud in the sky to make output unreliable *and it's hot*, the power can be of use powering a/c units. 

But usually perfectly clear days are below seasonal, when it's hot and humid and the power would be of use, you usually get cloudy periods.

I must mention, the panels are also loaded with toxic materials like lead and cadmium (https://www.forbes.com/sites/michae...hey-produce-so-much-toxic-waste/#72621c97121c) and there's no easy way to recycle them, they end up in landfills and leach crap into the ground water.

I would prefer highly radioactive waste, safely stored over solar panels in landfills any day.


----------



## user_12345a

Deja-vue said:


> You keep mentioning "hot Days". Heat is actually bad for Solar panels, they produce less when it is 36 Celsius vs 26 Celsius. They do, however function and produce power even on a cloudy or overcast Day.
> Why do you think Germany is number one in Solar production world wide? They have many rainy days, and the overcast in Nov-March is awful.
> Yet, they have more Sun hours than we have in SoCal, I see every Day how much Juice they produce.
> But whatever, you do whatever you have to do. Just don't post fiction, post FACTS.
> I urge Folks to do their own Research, and don't listen to user_12345 whatever posts.


They produce less when it's hotter, sun exposure being constant, but clouds aside, it's most sunny when it's also hot. The power output profile only matches demand when you have a lot of a/c use and it's clear outside.

As for germany, they're shutting down their nuclear plants and building coal fired plants. (Not that I'm opposed to coal, it's cheap, it's clean as long as the exhaust is scrubbed. the co2 climate change thing is bunk!)

The nukes they're scared of. Nuclear is the best form of power generation we have after hydro.

The wind and solar installations can't replace the nuke or fossil fuel power plants!

The capacity factor of solar in a climate that doesn't get a lot of sun is very poor. Solar panels don't work well in cloudy climates, but if you install enough capacity, sure, you can still be number one in solar production.

If wikipedia is to be trusted (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_power_in_Germany#Grid_capacity_and_stability_issues), germany only has like 3 peak sun hours per day on average.

So you install 1 kw of capacity and it only produces like 3 kwh per day, and not necessarily when the power is actually needed.

Brilliant! 12.5% capacity factor!



Nukes run at like what, 80%+? And fossil fuels plants are dispatchable, most are available to be dispatched like 90%+ of the time.


In 2017 in germany, they were paying 33 cents us per kwh! (https://www.reuters.com/article/ger...r-prices-at-record-high-verivox-idUSL8N1MZ30X)

Germany's fossil fuel consumption and emissions are actually increasing despite being number one in solar output.

Yah, they're number one....










...in crappy politically motivated energy policy.

California is also really bad. Yet ontario's energy policy over the last 10 years was inspired by germany/denmark/california's policies and electricity prices have doubled in that time.

Green energy is crap. Unless the goal is to get rich off of government mandated inflated feed in tariff and net metering programs, while the average guy struggles to pay the light bill and the poor can no longer afford the electricity at all.


----------



## user_12345a

How 40 gw of installed solar capacity performs in germany in december:










Source: http://notrickszone.com/2018/01/03/...-saw-only-10-hours-of-sun-in-all-of-december/


----------



## viper

I must say, I agree with both Deja and user because both are correct. Deja lives in a sunny area where electric cooling is dominant as is the KWH/day of solar, so all makes sense. 

Canada is a different animal. Available solar is less, yet actual energy need in the form of heat is greatly higher. 

However, I have to disagree with user regarding excusing green energy because it is not reliable. I can nearly assure with high confidence that you will see a transition in energy soon. Not entirely off fossil fuel, but it is totally ignorant to ignore "green" on the basis of availability. What if I can ship you some "green" energy when you need it? That is getting very close. Now, I know Alaska and Canada have a LOT of rural dwellers that are pretty much off the reservation. You will probably be on fossils long after the 1st world has moved on. 


The reality is what works for one part of the country, may not work for another. Math very easily determines what is needed and where the shortfall is. For example, look at Deja's system. He is running at roughly 10-13% efficiency of available solar. You think 40% would make him happy? However, his temp delta might be about 40* for a comfortable home during only a few peak hours during the day. Up North, guys are fighting 70-80* deltas for heating and that could go on for days. 


I am just saying, you would be ignorant to discount green energy because it IS there and yes we WILL be using it to perfection soon. 20yrs ago, did you think we would have the power of the best home computer in the palm of your hand? But as well, every area has to be examined carefully as well as energy "form" needs. I say form because energy is energy is energy, BUT converting forms of energy causes serious conversion losses.


----------



## user_12345a

As far as "green" energy goes, there's tremendous value in solar thermal hot water and passive house technology. You can build a house with high thermal mass, high r-values and south facing windows and if it's done really well, can avoid installing a furnace and just have a little bit of backup.

There's also value in reducing transportation related energy use by allowing people doing office jobs to work from home and manufacturing things more locally.

Using wind and pv for large heating, transportation and loads, I don't think we'll ever see. Even with a storage breakthrough, the amount of power produced really pails in comparison to what's required.

-------
speaking of grid tied setups, nicole foss, a true expert on these issues has a bit in this video starting at 12:35 ->


----------



## Deja-vue

user_12345a said:


> As for germany, they're shutting down their nuclear plants and building coal fired plants. (Not that I'm opposed to coal, it's cheap, it's clean as long as the exhaust is scrubbed. the co2 climate change thing is bunk!)
> 
> And here you are mistaken again:
> 
> https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kohleausstieg
> 
> Feel free to translate it. Germany is getting completely out of the Coal Industry.
> They are betting on renewable Energy. Face it...Fossil Fuels are limited. Solar is endless power. Clean.
> And about the Sun their getting:
> https://www.pv-magazine.com/2018/08/01/solar-power-production-reaches-new-high-in-germany-in-july/
> They are using already 27% of renewable energy, and the Goal is to be at 50% in 2050.
> 
> Solar power in Germany consists almost exclusively of photovoltaics (PV) and accounted for an estimated 6.2 to 6.9 percent of the country's net-electricity generation in 2016.
> 
> You can't stop this Revolution. China has already surpassed Germany in PV Installation, is the World Leader right now.
> 
> Last but not least, I'm enjoying free power forever, never have to pay that pesky $200-$300/month to my Power Company.
> Even If I buy a Tesla or any ECar for that matter, I still have enough Juice to recharge the Car.
> Heck, I have enough Power to run my Neighbors Pool pump if I had to.
> You can just sit in your Cave and be negative all you want. One Day, you'll understand clean, safe power. Without politics.


----------



## Oso954

There is too much of good thing. The German power grid was destabilized by too much solar and wind built in a crash program after their commitment to close their nukes. 

Solar power can drop simply from passing clouds. Wind can change speeds. 

When the clouds move on, or the wind speed picks up, you get a rapid jump in power output. Hydro plants or gas turbine peaking plants can react to those rapid changes much quicker than steam (fossil) plants can. 

https://www.instituteforenergyresearch.org/renewable/germanys-green-energy-destabilizing-electric-grids/


----------



## user_12345a

Solar only looks good if you do energy accounting fraud. There's no real revolution going on.


Percentage of total generated mean little, germany is still as dependent on conventional fossil fuel power plants as any other place on earth.

The ability of solar to spin back the meter and offset the power bill has little to do with being able to replace fossil fuel fired plants.

Your pv is nothing more than a financial investment. 

If you export it and then buy it back - have no way to control it, it's not the same, the fossil fuel power plants still must run.

And while there may be a war on coal going on in germany, promises to get rid of it, they've been opening new plants in the last 10 years that have a lifespan of 40++ years.

Here are two:
Lünen Trianel Coal Power Plant - 2013
Moorburg - 2015
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_power_stations_in_Germany#Thermal

Lunen plant is one of the cleanest and most efficient in the world -> https://www.powerengineeringint.com...-s-l-nen-plant-receives-clean-coal-award.html


If they do get rid of coal and nuclear, they'll be pissing through tons of natural gas and also dealing with huge price volatility.


----------



## user_12345a

Solar only looks good if you do energy accounting fraud. There's no real revolution going on.


Percentage of total generated mean little, germany is still as dependent on conventional fossil fuel power plants as any other place on earth.

The ability of solar to spin back the meter and offset the power bill has little to do with being able to replace fossil fuel fired plants.

Your pv is nothing more than a financial investment. 

If you export it and then buy it back - have no way to control it, it's not the same, the fossil fuel power plants still must run.

And while there may be a war on coal going on in germany, promises to get rid of it, they've been opening new plants in the last 10 years that have a lifespan of 40++ years.

Here are two:
Lünen Trianel Coal Power Plant - 2013
Moorburg - 2015
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_power_stations_in_Germany#Thermal

Lunen plant is one of the cleanest and most efficient in the world -> https://www.powerengineeringint.com...-s-l-nen-plant-receives-clean-coal-award.html


If they do get rid of coal and nuclear, they'll be pissing through tons of natural gas and also dealing with huge price volatility.


----------



## viper

Quite the debate here over our future. I should explain that we have an offshoot of our business in green tech. I have a pretty firm understanding of what is currently out there and what is coming. 

No, we will NOT be simply walking away from fossils in our lifetime! Or even the next. However, I don't think people quite understand the goal. Say currently you are on the grid so the poco burns 10tons of coal to provide your electric needs alone in a year. Now lets say you get solar generation and you are in a great area for solar, you may reduce that 10 tons of coal to 2 tons. 

Mark what I say here, you will see a drastic change in forecast when grid level battery tech becomes super affordable, dense, and safe. I use the word safe relatively because people seem to think you should be able to snuggle batteries in bed at night. Would you snuggle 5gal of gasoline? Back when gasoline came to market, you bet people were scared of it and rightfully so! It will light up with ease. However, we learned ways to handle it safely. We will do the same with batteries. The only issue with electrons is people can't see them and if there is one thing age brings, it is the experiences of ignorant people. You cannot look inside a battery and see if "it is full". 

We will not simply walk away from fossils tomorrow. It will take a long time because things will need restructured, and fossils will probably always have a use. Maybe just jet fuel and military apps. But it is totally ignorant and short sighted to ignore abundant clean renewable energy that is now affordable and practical. 

Now, my brain most certainly has a "business gear", but at the core, it is just your typical engineer brain where things have to make sense from a practicality standpoint. Let me throw this out because I now realize most humans ONLY worry about their own lifetime or the life of their kids. That is as far as it goes. 

Fossils were sort of a gift. Sort of like winning 100K at the lotto. It is a huge aid but will run out, and did say WILL! Basic math will prove this. Oil wells all peak in production, then decline, the population is doing nothing but going up and at some point, someone will need to limit the kid count or we will populate ourselves out of existence. 

Oil companies want you to believe the flow is endless because their little piggy bank depends on it. But you will start seeing problems in this century. Let me explain this way. Smart people will put that 100K you won in savings and use only if/when needed, dumb people will blow it because it is already there, why not. 

However, look 5 generations down the road. They will be mining our landfills for copper, nickel, zinc, etc, because we were dumb enough to not force mandates for "end of life" on sold goods. They also will not have much if any fossil fuel because we burned it all. That stuff needs to stay in the ground if we have other energy. 

I will stop here. I could go in for days. Nuclear needs to be abolished. HOWEVER, I believe we really should allow at least a few to be built in the modern ONLY to burn off all the waste they created. Let me make this clear, we should NEVER have moved forward with nuclear until the waste issue was resolved. At current, we have ZERO ways to store anything for a guaranteed 24k years, and that is simply ridiculous. If you are making waste that will kill you in days if you even get close to it, it needs rethought. 

In one way or another, ALL of Japan and even the USA in Cali will experience effects from the Japan nuke failure. Those effects are so devastating that we have to look outside the box a bit here.


----------



## Deja-vue

Viper nailed it.
I could care less about all the Nay-sayers, my Home is powered by Solar throughout the Year, only in December I'm buying a couple of KWh's, no big deal.
Since February, I've accumulated a $-800 electricity bill. Yes, minus.
They can take some out if I need it in December. Fact is, I haven't paid more that $10/month since February 2016.
I make my own financial decisions, and Power goes up all the Time.
Fact is, here in California the Electricity has doubled in just 12 years.
DOUBLED! Come on, don't you want to save some pretty pennies and do something for the environment too?
I know Folks in Finland who have Solar and they have no Sun at all in Dec-Jan.
LOL!


----------



## Oso954

> I could care less about all the Nay-sayers, my Home is powered by Solar throughout the Year, only in December I'm buying a couple of KWh's, no big deal.


Thats a real optimistic way of looking at it. If you look at the capital cost of a solar system (without rebates) it’s a long payback for most people. Many places don’t have the generous rebates we have had here in California. Nor are their metering agreements necessarily as good.

Your home doesn’t run on solar. It was designed to run balanced your usage, with the grid acting similar to a battery. You over produce in the summer and under produce in the winter. If you had to design the system to stand alone, you would need more panels and a large battery bank (and a different inverter).

Have you ever experianced a power outage since your solar system was installed ? 
Assuming it is like most grid tie systems, it shuts down when you lose grid voltage/frequency.

I’m not knocking your decision to go solar, just pointing out that there are equally good reasons not to. It’s what is important to the individual that can swing the decisions.


----------



## viper

Oso, I think you are still missing it. Most business folks in green tech understand what you are saying, which is that you don't make power when the sun don't shine. We also understand that tons of homes and businesses will not be able to generate their own energy from solar due to space constraints or large usage. Those folks will always rely on the grid, BUT how to grid is powered is where people don't get it. 

Have you heard of a dual fuel engine? That is exactly what modern steam powered energy plants will be. Those turbines run on steam and that steam can be made with coal OR solar, it matters none. You can switch fuels as needed. Yes there is lag, and it is not seamless, but there is most certainly more than one plant providing energy. 

Believe it or not, people making power at their home is a HUGE problem and one of the reasons these incentives are reducing. Power plants cost a lot to build and predicting power needs is going to get tricky, especially when there is minimal load when the sun shines, then clouds roll in, and demand spikes!!! It is going to take some tuning. 

People didn't think fuel injection would be a thing because it was just too complicated and the carburetor is so simple. Where are we today? 

Now, I will agree that some people that want to buy panels simply don't understand how ROI works and if your ROI coincides with the end of life of your panels, all you are doing is buying a bunch of energy up front! You aren't "making" a dime. However, as electric rates keep going up, and panel prices go down, this does nothing but help the ROI of solar. 

Electric companies have carried a monopoly FAR too long and User even understands that up north, things look different. I am not going to put all our efforts on a public forum just yet because we are still developing stuff. It becomes frustrating trying to overcome efficiencies of energy conversion. The day we have PV panels with 80% eff that are affordable, batteries with the same energy density as gasoline, is the day you get to watch mohamad go broke in sand land, which I will enjoy! However, that land will become even more unstable than it is now.


----------



## Deja-vue

> Your home doesn’t run on solar. It was designed to run balanced your usage, with the grid acting similar to a battery. You over produce in the summer and under produce in the winter.


Mistaken again. A Solar Company figured I would need 32 Panels to offset my Electricity Bill. And they wanted $30K.
So I did it myself with a couple of Roofers and an Electrician. Spent $18K on a 44 Panel System. Fed Rebate was $6K. The 'California Initiative" has dried out in 2014.
The System will have paid for itself in August 2020.
I over-produce 10.5 month of the year. 
A Tesla Wall is easily added with no new Inverters, but still too costly. Many new manufacturers are coming into the Home Battery market, currently I'm looking at the LG Chem, but it is only available in Europe and Australia.

You are correct, if the Grid goes down, all I have is a 3KW emergency connection from the Inverters, and production into the Grid is shut down for obvious reasons.
You Guys can argue all day about this, I am a happy camper and the only regret I have is not having it done much earlier.
:vs_cool:


----------



## viper

Deja, I am curious what all you have looked at in terms of energy storage? Which options? Are you just looking primarily at Lithium based storage?


----------



## Deja-vue

viper said:


> Deja, I am curious what all you have looked at in terms of energy storage? Which options? Are you just looking primarily at Lithium based storage?


I looked at several, but they seem a bit expensive still.
My first choice was the LG Chem:

http://www.freecleansolar.com/9-8kWh-LG-Chem-Home-Battery-RESU10H-p/resu10h.htm?gclid=CjwKCAjwpeXeBRA6EiwAyoJPKv0Pu8tkL5SnPJvgaDnBdYX_FHH-CbPCDiAOIFE_yuNVMU9T4ZsoXxoCHWYQAvD_BwE

Of course, we all know about the Tesla Wall:

https://www.tesla.com/powerwall

A good Read here:

https://www.businessinsider.com/rechargeable-battery-options-compete-tesla-2017-5

I guess I'll pull the Trigger when they get below $5K or so. For now, they just don't make sense to me. The ROI is too long.


----------



## viper

You know, one thing that is just baffling me being in this industry, but an issue that is not easily resolved. We adopted AC power due to the technology at the time to move power over long distances. Times have changed but we keep chasing AC adaptations because the grid operates on AC. However, most people don't realize that 90% of the devices in a home are actually DC devices. your laptop chargers, phone chargers, general electronics, etc. We spend a lot in green tech to convert DC to AC just to convert it again to DC in devices. 

Now, I know high voltage DC comes with some inherent switching issues and DC is harder to manage in some instances, but at smaller home type loads, I am surprised the industry has not tried to evolve yet. Imagine all your lighting being fed from a central DC buss, which eliminates a LOT of energy wasting components. LED will light our future. 

For instance, has anyone bought high end audio components? Ever notice car audio is much cheaper? That's because there is a LOT that goes into simply rectifying AC in the device and making it audio clean, not to mention all the wasted energy. 

Then you talk about motor loads! We have been converting AC to DC and back to AC for decades in VFDs. Half of a VFDs electrics are simply a DC rectifier circuit. We know well how to run ANY AC motor with DC power all while have added motor protection built in and the ability to soft start the motor and run it at nearly any speed we want. 

While I am sure Lithium will be instrumental in the short term for energy storage, I do have concerns that the race to be cheaper and boast higher ratings will come at a cost of quality in the amount of cycles, discharge rates, etc. 

I am more involved with flow battery tech, which is a tech that is evolving very quickly and has distinct advantages over Li tech. There are even hybrid chemistries that are leaning on Li but as a flow through electrolyte. 

Its all very interesting. Power companies secretly know they have a HUGE problem selling energy in the future. If one thing is for sure, they are going to get checked pretty quick on inflated energy costs because that does nothing but make green energy more appealing.


----------



## viper

markbrown said:


> I heard barely all of the solar systems work with 100% efficiency. whats the theory behind it.


I don't even understand your comment. "barely all"???? No clue what you are asking.


----------



## Calson

The state of California has an excellent website and calculator where you input the type of panel and number of panels and model of inverter that is planned and it will provide the output based on a tilt angle for maximum output for the year or a tilt angle to maximize output during the summer months. In general the tilt angle should be roughly the same as the latitude of your location. Further north the tilt angle needs to be greater to get maximum output.

http://www.csi-epbb.com/default.aspx

At the time I had two sets of panels or arrays and so each produced a different total voltage which a standard inverter cannot handle. I got the company to find and install a two-string inverter so one exterior box with two inverters to handle each array. Now this are common and used where there are panels on a roof with two sections as even with the same number of panels on each section the output voltages will be different. 

I live in California and only two cities have forced true net metering with the utility companies and I am not in one of them. So PG&E buys my excess output at 3 cents a kWh and sells it to its customers for more than 14 cents a kWh and as much as 34 cents per kWh. I do benefit in that I pay $5 a month for a meter reading fee. 

I bought the panels outright but even a lease deal would make financial sense. I could use the tax credit and so bought them myself. University studies have shown that a house with solar sells on average for $17,000 more than a comparable house without solar and sells in half the time. Systems installed in the 1970's are still producing 90% of their rated output so no one knows the life expectancy of the panels.

Photovoltaic panels in addition to saving me money, also saves my neighbors as their rates are lower when the local utility gets my power during peak usage periods and does so without having to build a new power plant that would sit idle 50% or more of the time. PV's also provide power smoothing on the grid and reduce the chances for a brownout or blackout which is why large commercial PV operations are important to the stability of the national electrical grid.

I was quoted a cost of several thousand dollars to remove the panel and place them up on the roof again and so I had the house re-roofed before doing the panel installation. I had a roofing company do both the new roof and the solar installation and but chose them as they did both commercial and residential installations. At the time only commercial installers could buy the commercial panels from manufacturers and residential installers could only buy the lower output residential class panels. 

From a purely economical perspective installing enough capacity to compensate for half your electrical consumption would be a good place to start. With our own bills we were getting into the second tier and having to pay the 34 cents a kWh even though we do not run an air conditioner, but we are at the mercy of the utility company and our public utilities commissioners are corrupt so there is no control over what customers are charged. 

Be careful about the placement of the panels. A neighbor let the contractor decide and half the year his panels are in the shade as a result. They mounted the panels where the feed to the electrical panel would be as short as possible instead of where the output would be the greatest.


----------



## viper

I would be really curious what panels you are installing? Obviously if your tier system puts you up into $.34/kwh area, that really helps justify the install. 

What batteries are you using? I have been watching all the different technologies and never sure who is winning. I just cannot see any new system using FLA tech today.


----------



## Deja-vue

For all the Naysayers out there, here is a snippet of my last electricity Bill:


----------



## Deja-vue

And yes, it does have a minus in front of the amount. This is where Solar is the most Fun.


----------



## Windows on Wash

Who are the naysayers? You live in a part of the country that heavily subsidizes the initial cost of PV. In that situation where the other taxpayers have been strong armed into investing in your PV array, the costs are quite manageable. In the rest of the parts of the country where folks aren't getting huge amounts of money back, the cost projections and payback schedules are farm more prolonged. 

Clearly in SoCal, you also are in a prime climate/exposure for PV. That system should be paying itself back lickity split. 

You will note from past comments, I am a fan of PV and I think with battery advancements, it will have nearly universal applicability for this country and future power generation. That said, your state would probably be well advised to deal with the hundreds of billions in unfunded liabilities than it should be worried about promoting solar.


----------



## viper

Well worded Windows. Deja, no one is naysaying anything, I am just trying to find out more specifics if you have them available. I do agree that if your electric rate goes stupid high, your state offers large incentives to buy green energy products, AND your state happens to provide a large amount of solar energy, it all sounds great. 

However, the basic economics is with your bill (credit) of $162, so lets just say an average of $100/mo (assuming the power co actually writes you a check, which most will NOT do), that is $1200/yr. So if you spent $20K for a system to get you to that point, that is a 17yr ROI assuming nothing breaks, fails, needs simple repairs, etc. 

I am NOT knocking it, I am the one that started the thread, I just like to get ALL the numbers on the table, and the products used, their advertised values vs their real world performance.


----------



## Deja-vue

viper said:


> Well worded Windows. Deja, no one is naysaying anything, I am just trying to find out more specifics if you have them available. I do agree that if your electric rate goes stupid high, your state offers large incentives to buy green energy products, AND your state happens to provide a large amount of solar energy, it all sounds great.
> 
> However, the basic economics is with your bill (credit) of $162, so lets just say an average of $100/mo (assuming the power co actually writes you a check, which most will NOT do), that is $1200/yr. So if you spent $20K for a system to get you to that point, that is a 17yr ROI assuming nothing breaks, fails, needs simple repairs, etc.
> 
> I am NOT knocking it, I am the one that started the thread, I just like to get ALL the numbers on the table, and the products used, their advertised values vs their real world performance.



You are way off, @viper.

My system was installed in Feb 2016.
Electricity before = $300 and more a month.
After = $7.00
system is complete DIY.
Cost = $18.000
Rebate from the Feds = $6000

Savings per Year = $3200 minimum.
ROI is August, 2020.

I am getting sick and tired explaining how much money I am saving.
I am so DONE with this Thread.

Go ahead and flame me, and tell everyone that Solar sux.
Fact is, you won't be able to stop this.
More and more Folks see that it is the only way to save some serious Money.
I really don't care what everyone else posts here, because I am leaving this stupid thread.
:vs_mad:


----------



## viper

WOW! Someone is upset for apparently no reason at all. NO ONE is debating that you are saving or making money! Even me! My numbers in the previous thread are purely hypothetical. Calm down and understand there are others in this thread than yourself. I am personally interested in solar products and as an educated engineer in green energy, I fully understand the available energy in solar.


----------



## lenaitch

I can understand a shortened ROI cycle on a largely DIY installation but, assuming that most people cannot do that, how would the numbers look on a paid-for installation without subsidy? Also, the greatest population growth is in high-density urban areas (it is here anyway) with most new development being high-rise condos and apartments as opposed to detached single family dwellings, I'm not sure there is sufficient roof/yard space per dwelling to make it feasible. Where I am, most houses are in the woods and for several months of the year, the roof is covered in several feet of snow. I don't know enough about the technology to know how well that would work.


----------



## u3b3rg33k

Not mine but this one is pretty slick:
https://057tech.com/solar
44kW solar, 186 kWh Storage, 64kW of inverters.


----------

