4 ms·

Everyone seems to be saying this but whenever I get quotes they are always the same, for every dollar the hardware goes down the labor seems to go up the exact

by diddid 2y ago

Everyone seems to be saying this but whenever I get quotes they are always the same, for every dollar the hardware goes down the labor seems to go up the exact same amount… strange how that works.

opo 2y ago
Solar energy comes up often on HN, but it is misleading to talk about solar without differentiating between utility grid solar and consumer rooftop solar. Simply put, utility grid solar provides low cost power and consumer rooftop solar does not and will not. The rooftop solar price is usually hidden because no power source has been as subsidized as rooftop solar. Besides direct subsidies, wealthier home owners have often been paid the retail rate for the electricity they sell to the grid which causes higher electricity bills for those who can't afford to put panels on their roof - sort of a reverse Robinhood scheme.
- nicoburns 2y ago
  The thing with rooftop/local solar is that it doesn't need to compete with wholesale electricity prices, it only need to compete with retail prices. It's already competitive there, to the point that most places are removing subsidies and retargeting them at storage (batteries), transmission, or EV charging infrastructure.
  - opo 2y ago
    It isn't very clear what you mean. If utilities are required to do net metering (i.e. buy all power whenever it is produced at the retail rate rather than buy what they need at the wholesale rate) it is a huge unsustainable subsidy to wealthier homeowners paid for by the less wealthy. It's free riding on the reliability provided by the grid, putting large costs on the less well off. As these costs grew, that also provided an incentive for consumer solar installations to increase. Eventually the issue was impossible to ignore and states are starting to remove the subsidies. It is strange that anyone thought net metering ever made any sense. As the statista.com report says >...Rooftop solar photovoltaic installations on residential buildings and nuclear power have the highest unsubsidized levelized costs of energy generation in the United States. If not for federal and state subsidies, rooftop solar PV would come with a price tag between 117 and 282 U.S. dollars per megawatt hour. https://www.statista.com/statistics/493797/estimated-levelized-cost-of-energy-generation-in-the-us-by-technology/ https://www.statista.com/statistics/493797/estimated-leveliz... Looks like that report is a year old, but I doubt the installation costs have really gone down much since then. (Panel prices come down, but labor costs, etc don't.)
    - nicoburns 2y ago
      > If utilities are required to do net metering Sure, but they are not in most places. IMO subsidies made sense to kickstart the industry given the external costs imposed by climate change, but I agree that they don't anymore. > >...Rooftop solar photovoltaic installations on residential buildings and nuclear power have the highest unsubsidized levelized costs of energy generation in the United States. I don't think levelized cost for generation is the correct metric here. That ignores the costs imposed by grid transmission (and utility profit margins). It's also worth noting that installation costs in the US can be much higher than those in other countries (even other wealthy countries).
      - opo 2y ago
        >...IMO subsidies made sense to kickstart the industry given the external costs imposed by climate change, but I agree that they don't anymore. In general, if a dollar of subsidy spent on utility based solar will go much further than a dollar of subsidy spent on consumer rooftop solar, then it makes sense to spend that dollar on where it will go the furthest. That is true now, and was true 10 years ago. >...That ignores the costs imposed by grid transmission (and utility profit margins). But aren't those installations also attached to the grid? If not, the costs go very very high if you have enough battery that you don't need to attach to the grid. >...It's also worth noting that installation costs in the US can be much higher than those in other countries (even other wealthy countries). I wouldn't be surprised if some or all the OECD countries also subsidize rooftop solar, so it might be hard to compare actual costs.
    - rahimnathwani 2y ago
      282 U.S. dollars per megawatt hour Here in San Francisco, PG&E charges about $450 per megawatt hour (35 cents for electricity plus 10 cents for delivery, per kWh). So it seems like solar would be cheaper even without any subsidy?
      - opo 2y ago
        Providing the infrastructure and reliability of the grid is very expensive, so there is a huge difference between the wholesale costs and retail rates for delivered electricity. From the latest Lazard report on levelized costs, they estimate utility solar has a cost range of about $29 - $92 per megawatt. Rooftop residential has a cost estimate of about $122 to $284. Both are subsidized, but money is limited and is fungible - a dollar spent subsidizing utility solar will go much further than a dollar spent subsidizing rooftop residential solar. https://www.lazard.com/media/xemfey0k/lazards-lcoeplus-june-2024-_vf.pdf https://www.lazard.com/media/xemfey0k/lazards-lcoeplus-june-...
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
purplezooey 2y ago
Referring to rooftop solar, this is definitely a problem.
14 2y ago
I feel that this is true for my area as well. I think for now the installers are taking the savings from cheaper panels and increasing their profit. I think the only way to reap those savings would be to do a self installation but that is becoming harder with permits and such and this is okay because we need safe electricity. I am in Canada and we don't get the most optimal sun for solar. It is still worth it but takes I believe about 15 years to finally break even. So not a huge amount of people are installing it so there is not a huge competitive market. If panel prices fall enough other companies will start offering it at a cheaper price and that is when we will start to see benefits.

by diddid 2y ago

Everyone seems to be saying this but whenever I get quotes they are always the same, for every dollar the hardware goes down the labor seems to go up the exact same amount… strange how that works.

opo 2y ago

Solar energy comes up often on HN, but it is misleading to talk about solar without differentiating between utility grid solar and consumer rooftop solar. Simply put, utility grid solar provides low cost power and consumer rooftop solar does not and will not. The rooftop solar price is usually hidden because no power source has been as subsidized as rooftop solar. Besides direct subsidies, wealthier home owners have often been paid the retail rate for the electricity they sell to the grid which causes higher electricity bills for those who can't afford to put panels on their roof - sort of a reverse Robinhood scheme.

nicoburns 2y ago
The thing with rooftop/local solar is that it doesn't need to compete with wholesale electricity prices, it only need to compete with retail prices. It's already competitive there, to the point that most places are removing subsidies and retargeting them at storage (batteries), transmission, or EV charging infrastructure.
- opo 2y ago
  It isn't very clear what you mean. If utilities are required to do net metering (i.e. buy all power whenever it is produced at the retail rate rather than buy what they need at the wholesale rate) it is a huge unsustainable subsidy to wealthier homeowners paid for by the less wealthy. It's free riding on the reliability provided by the grid, putting large costs on the less well off. As these costs grew, that also provided an incentive for consumer solar installations to increase. Eventually the issue was impossible to ignore and states are starting to remove the subsidies. It is strange that anyone thought net metering ever made any sense. As the statista.com report says >...Rooftop solar photovoltaic installations on residential buildings and nuclear power have the highest unsubsidized levelized costs of energy generation in the United States. If not for federal and state subsidies, rooftop solar PV would come with a price tag between 117 and 282 U.S. dollars per megawatt hour. https://www.statista.com/statistics/493797/estimated-levelized-cost-of-energy-generation-in-the-us-by-technology/ https://www.statista.com/statistics/493797/estimated-leveliz... Looks like that report is a year old, but I doubt the installation costs have really gone down much since then. (Panel prices come down, but labor costs, etc don't.)
  - nicoburns 2y ago
    > If utilities are required to do net metering Sure, but they are not in most places. IMO subsidies made sense to kickstart the industry given the external costs imposed by climate change, but I agree that they don't anymore. > >...Rooftop solar photovoltaic installations on residential buildings and nuclear power have the highest unsubsidized levelized costs of energy generation in the United States. I don't think levelized cost for generation is the correct metric here. That ignores the costs imposed by grid transmission (and utility profit margins). It's also worth noting that installation costs in the US can be much higher than those in other countries (even other wealthy countries).
    - opo 2y ago
      >...IMO subsidies made sense to kickstart the industry given the external costs imposed by climate change, but I agree that they don't anymore. In general, if a dollar of subsidy spent on utility based solar will go much further than a dollar of subsidy spent on consumer rooftop solar, then it makes sense to spend that dollar on where it will go the furthest. That is true now, and was true 10 years ago. >...That ignores the costs imposed by grid transmission (and utility profit margins). But aren't those installations also attached to the grid? If not, the costs go very very high if you have enough battery that you don't need to attach to the grid. >...It's also worth noting that installation costs in the US can be much higher than those in other countries (even other wealthy countries). I wouldn't be surprised if some or all the OECD countries also subsidize rooftop solar, so it might be hard to compare actual costs.
  - rahimnathwani 2y ago
    282 U.S. dollars per megawatt hour Here in San Francisco, PG&E charges about $450 per megawatt hour (35 cents for electricity plus 10 cents for delivery, per kWh). So it seems like solar would be cheaper even without any subsidy?
    - opo 2y ago
      Providing the infrastructure and reliability of the grid is very expensive, so there is a huge difference between the wholesale costs and retail rates for delivered electricity. From the latest Lazard report on levelized costs, they estimate utility solar has a cost range of about $29 - $92 per megawatt. Rooftop residential has a cost estimate of about $122 to $284. Both are subsidized, but money is limited and is fungible - a dollar spent subsidizing utility solar will go much further than a dollar spent subsidizing rooftop residential solar. https://www.lazard.com/media/xemfey0k/lazards-lcoeplus-june-2024-_vf.pdf https://www.lazard.com/media/xemfey0k/lazards-lcoeplus-june-...
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]

purplezooey 2y ago

Referring to rooftop solar, this is definitely a problem.

14 2y ago

I feel that this is true for my area as well. I think for now the installers are taking the savings from cheaper panels and increasing their profit. I think the only way to reap those savings would be to do a self installation but that is becoming harder with permits and such and this is okay because we need safe electricity. I am in Canada and we don't get the most optimal sun for solar. It is still worth it but takes I believe about 15 years to finally break even. So not a huge amount of people are installing it so there is not a huge competitive market. If panel prices fall enough other companies will start offering it at a cheaper price and that is when we will start to see benefits.