3 ms·
I feel a better way to account for Solar panel costs is to look at the cost per KWH over the expected lifetime of 25 years. A system might pay itself off in 5-7
by PaulKeeble 3y ago
I feel a better way to account for Solar panel costs is to look at the cost per KWH over the expected lifetime of 25 years. A system might pay itself off in 5-7 years which is fairly typical but the other way of looking at it is the power is about 1/4 the price of power from the grid. Makes you wonder how it is that power from the grid is so ludicrously above its actual capitol cost of production, the systems getting that power to places must be crazy expensive.
Tilt systems aren't worth the money. They cost too much to make and with the same money more panels produces more power.
- geoffmunn 3y agoAlso it's another point of failure. If (or when) the motor fails, then you could be facing in an extremely suboptimal direction and it might take more than a few days to fix.
- Simon_ORourke 3y ago> Makes you wonder how it is that power from the grid is so ludicrously above its actual capitol cost of production, the systems getting that power to places must be crazy expensive. This is my thinking behind delaying getting some panels for my own home, if they're getting cheaper AND more efficient, surely that's going to have knock-on effects on the suppliers too?
- thelastgallon 3y agoUtilities are cost + profit. They are a cartel of generation, transmission, and distribution companies working together to increase costs, which increases profits.
- remus 3y ago> Makes you wonder how it is that power from the grid is so ludicrously above its actual capitol cost of production, the systems getting that power to places must be crazy expensive. It's an apples to oranges comparison. Solar panels don't provide power overnight for example, but people place a lot of value in being able to use power at night. Likewise the grid scales up and down to meet the demands placed on it which a basic solar setup (i.e. without batteries) can't do. Then there's reliability, transmission etc.
- PaulKeeble 3y agoYou have batteries that cover overnight and that only adds about 20% extra cost and it pays for itself due to enormous difference in price compared to the grid.
- sunshinesnacks 3y agoThat won’t get you all the way through the night, every night. At least not with anything close to typical household energy use in the US. For that you need a properly sized off grid system, which can easily be 20-30 kW of solar and 50-150 kWh of batteries. Enough to get you through 50-10 cloudy days (depending on your location) with less than 1 kWh per day per kW from solar and 40-60 kWh per day of electricity use.
- 10u152 3y agoThat’s so wild to me. I have a modest 6.6kw solar system in Australia and average 4kwh a day bought from the grid. No battery, no gas, live in a hot climate and run the A/C about 8 months a year.
- hparadiz 3y agoI have a 12kw system in Southern California. Recently it's been raining and overcast many days so I've had a shortage. Only in the winter though. I'm usually running a surplus.
- sunshinesnacks 3y agoHow many square feet (or meters) are air conditioned? And you mentioned average daily purchases from the grid, but do you know what the maximum is? In the US, I think the "pinch point" for off-grid systems is usually in the winter for an all-electric home. Shorter days and more likely to have multiple fully cloudy days in a row, at least for a lot of the US.
- 10u152 3y ago
- Johnny555 3y agoMakes you wonder how it is that power from the grid is so ludicrously above its actual capitol cost of production Delivery charges, mostly -- it costs a lot of money to build and maintain a power grid. Wholesale prices in my state are around 4.5 cents/KWh, but delivered prices are much higher (around 33 cents/KWh depending on rate plan).