4 ms·

110kWh in one year from 320W is quite bad. One would at least expect 250kWh normally, even more under ideal circumstances. So a better setup can easily half the

110kWh in one year from 320W is quite bad. One would at least expect 250kWh normally, even more under ideal circumstances. So a better setup can easily half the time until break even. Also, the inverter needs to be scaled to the panels, obviously. If your inverter can do xW, your panels should at least do xW (or more with east/west orientation), or you effectively lose money. So a balcony installation is obviously not the best approach, but one has to wonder about a rooftop installation. What if every apartment would get some part of the roof allocated for private solar? It stands to reason that such an installation could pay for itself in 10 years or less.

frankus 5y ago
I live around 49°N and get an average of ~3 hours of rated output per day over the course of the year. OP's is closer to 1 hour per day. My array does have a clear view of the southern sky, and the angle is supposedly ideal for a fixed array at my latitude. And our longest days tend to also be our sunniest, but it looks like rooftop is much better than balcony, where it's feasible. (Interesting aside: everywhere on earth (to a first order approximation) gets the same number of hours of daylight over the course of a year. Thus the biggest downside of a higher latitude solar installation is that the sun is passing through more atmosphere on its way to your panel).