4 ms·

FWIW, at least in my case, the numbers here seem optimistic. I had SolarCity come out and do a proposal for my house in San Jose about four years ago. Because m

FWIW, at least in my case, the numbers here seem optimistic. I had SolarCity come out and do a proposal for my house in San Jose about four years ago. Because my single story house is surrounded by big trees and two story houses, they said I only had a small area where they could install panels with sufficient efficiency, for a 3kW system. Sunspot says I could install an 8kW system covering 1475 sq ft, compared to about 800 sq ft for the Solar City system.

qooleot 11y ago
Maybe panel prices have dropped enough in the last 4 years that partially-lit areas are now worth covering in solar (cost < savings * acceptable ROI months).
ChuckMcM 11y ago
Perhaps it should link to a solar installer, and a lumber jack :-) More seriously though, I installed solar about 13 years ago now on my roof, California has some case law about trees blocking solar, post install, which was decided in the favor of the solar panel owner. The city tree across the street had gotten large enough in the last 10 years to start shadowing some of my panels. So when the arborists were in our neighborhood I pointed it out, and they cut a chunk off the top of the city tree so that it would stop doing that. At one level this was "fine" in the sense they were totally ok with that and felt they were obligated under California law to do so. At another level, "solar rights" ala "water rights" or "mineral rights" for a property are probably going to become a thing at some point. In your case, if the trees around you fell down for some reason, you install solar, and the landowners/city replant trees, by virtue of the fact that your solar is there it will impose a trimming burden on the new trees. But there is no requirement that people clear trees to make it possible for you to exercise your "solar rights". That is the next kerfluffle I expect in California.
- protomyth 11y ago
  > Perhaps it should link to a solar installer, and a lumber jack :-) Let's not be cutting down the carbon dioxide remover when we're trying to go eco-friendly. :)
  - mikepurvis 11y ago
    Any gains from PV would be washed away by increased air conditioner usage. If you have a house in shade, be very happy.
    - secabeen 11y ago
      That assumes you have an air conditioner. In coastal California, they aren't common in older homes.
    - aidenn0 11y ago
      Energy wise, I wish my lot were less shady. I spend 0kWh per year on AC (days over 90 are rare), but heating is another matter. Which reminds me. If anyone knows a good way to retrofit an house with no ducting and no natural gas for any form of efficient heating, let me know.
      - andor436 11y ago
        Heat pump! You can get wall mounted units that work just like an A/C (but in reverse of course.) Efficiencies have gotten pretty good in the last decade. Check out units made by Daiken, Hitachi, Mitsubishi for example. I know they make multi-room versions. You'll need to run the refrigerant lines, but that's usually a much smaller task than adding ducting.
        aidenn0 11y ago
        This is the direction I'm most likely to go. The other option is a fireplace insert. Cheap, but not as environmentally friendly.
      - anigbrowl 11y ago
        If you have a crawl space or basement, you can install electrical under-floor heating at fairly affordable costs. Basically the heating element comes in a roll which you then tack the the underside of your floor. I have lived with such a system before for a year and it was both easy to use and did a good job of heating the space. I don't remember the electricity costs so I can't comment on the economic efficiency, but AFAIK it's moderately good. I wish I had it in this house instead of the noisy, draughty, and inefficient gas-powered duct heating which I avoid switching on whenever possible.
- pm24601 11y ago
  Actually in California a solar panel owner already does have solar rights. http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/displaycode?section=prc&group=25001-26000&file=25980-25986 http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/displaycode?section=prc&gr... "25982. After the installation of a solar collector, a person owning or in control of another property shall not allow a tree or shrub to be placed or, if placed, to grow on that property so as to cast a shadow greater than 10 percent of the collector absorption area upon that solar collector surface at any one time between the hours of 10 a.m. and 2 p.m., local standard time." There are a number of exceptions later in the act, including a notification requirement. However, once a solar system is installed - a neighbor can't cause the system to be shaded with impunity.

qooleot 11y ago

Maybe panel prices have dropped enough in the last 4 years that partially-lit areas are now worth covering in solar (cost < savings * acceptable ROI months).

ChuckMcM 11y ago

Perhaps it should link to a solar installer, and a lumber jack :-) More seriously though, I installed solar about 13 years ago now on my roof, California has some case law about trees blocking solar, post install, which was decided in the favor of the solar panel owner. The city tree across the street had gotten large enough in the last 10 years to start shadowing some of my panels. So when the arborists were in our neighborhood I pointed it out, and they cut a chunk off the top of the city tree so that it would stop doing that. At one level this was "fine" in the sense they were totally ok with that and felt they were obligated under California law to do so. At another level, "solar rights" ala "water rights" or "mineral rights" for a property are probably going to become a thing at some point. In your case, if the trees around you fell down for some reason, you install solar, and the landowners/city replant trees, by virtue of the fact that your solar is there it will impose a trimming burden on the new trees. But there is no requirement that people clear trees to make it possible for you to exercise your "solar rights". That is the next kerfluffle I expect in California.

protomyth 11y ago
> Perhaps it should link to a solar installer, and a lumber jack :-) Let's not be cutting down the carbon dioxide remover when we're trying to go eco-friendly. :)
- mikepurvis 11y ago
  Any gains from PV would be washed away by increased air conditioner usage. If you have a house in shade, be very happy.
  - secabeen 11y ago
    That assumes you have an air conditioner. In coastal California, they aren't common in older homes.
  - aidenn0 11y ago
    Energy wise, I wish my lot were less shady. I spend 0kWh per year on AC (days over 90 are rare), but heating is another matter. Which reminds me. If anyone knows a good way to retrofit an house with no ducting and no natural gas for any form of efficient heating, let me know.
    - andor436 11y ago
      Heat pump! You can get wall mounted units that work just like an A/C (but in reverse of course.) Efficiencies have gotten pretty good in the last decade. Check out units made by Daiken, Hitachi, Mitsubishi for example. I know they make multi-room versions. You'll need to run the refrigerant lines, but that's usually a much smaller task than adding ducting.
      - aidenn0 11y ago
        This is the direction I'm most likely to go. The other option is a fireplace insert. Cheap, but not as environmentally friendly.
    - anigbrowl 11y ago
      If you have a crawl space or basement, you can install electrical under-floor heating at fairly affordable costs. Basically the heating element comes in a roll which you then tack the the underside of your floor. I have lived with such a system before for a year and it was both easy to use and did a good job of heating the space. I don't remember the electricity costs so I can't comment on the economic efficiency, but AFAIK it's moderately good. I wish I had it in this house instead of the noisy, draughty, and inefficient gas-powered duct heating which I avoid switching on whenever possible.
pm24601 11y ago
Actually in California a solar panel owner already does have solar rights. http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/displaycode?section=prc&group=25001-26000&file=25980-25986 http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/displaycode?section=prc&gr... "25982. After the installation of a solar collector, a person owning or in control of another property shall not allow a tree or shrub to be placed or, if placed, to grow on that property so as to cast a shadow greater than 10 percent of the collector absorption area upon that solar collector surface at any one time between the hours of 10 a.m. and 2 p.m., local standard time." There are a number of exceptions later in the act, including a notification requirement. However, once a solar system is installed - a neighbor can't cause the system to be shaded with impunity.