7 ms·
So City Hall would actually save less money (12k vs 13k/14k) than the two regular homes I tried in San Francisco. If the numbers are correct, we're looking at $
by joesmo 11y ago
So City Hall would actually save less money (12k vs 13k/14k) than the two regular homes I tried in San Francisco. If the numbers are correct, we're looking at $650-700 a year in savings. Not bad, but not that great either, especially considering heating alone in both buildings I looked at ran $150-300 / month (including summer which is hardly warmer at night in SF). Can solar panels be installed at such a price on a regular home? I doubt there's any incentive for City Hall here.
EDIT: I also doubt the calculations are correct considering that city hall's roof is many times larger than the two homes I looked at, yet saves less money.
- magicalist 11y agoIt looks like it's only tuned for residences (and maybe small apartment buildings) as you can only set the max electricity bill at $500 per month. I'm sure the city hall's bill is much higher.
- netfire 11y agoI'm guessing you left the average monthly electric bill slider at the $125/month position. You'd have to adjust the to what it actually is for City Hall, which I'd think is a lot more than $125/month.
- joesmo 11y agoThere's no such slider on my page, only a text box. Tried disabling privacy plugins, but they're not the culprit.
- anorwell 11y agoOne of the tunable parameters is the "size of your electric bill", which defaults to $150/month and maxes at $500/month -- far too low for a city hall, I should think. This is the limiting factor here, not the size of the roof. At $500/month, the recommended installation size is 765 square feet, but the total roof size is 50,171 sq feet. Only a small fraction of the roof area is being used. This has clearly been designed for residences and not larger buildings.