4 ms·

“When cost drops low enough, any surface with any exposure to sunlight is in scope for installing solar on if it can yield more energy than the cost of installi

by derriz 1y ago

“When cost drops low enough, any surface with any exposure to sunlight is in scope for installing solar on if it can yield more energy than the cost of installing solar on it.” I don’t see the logic? As panel prices drop, installation costs start dominating overall cost of energy produced and so economic pressures will be on simpler and simpler PV installations. Laying a panel almost flat on the ground amongst thousands of others will be a cheaper process - both initially and in terms of ongoing maintenance - than anything that involves sending workers up ladders or cherrypickers attaching and wiring a panel onto the side of a building. So grid scale will start to dominate over domestic or “novelty” (e.g. floating panels on reservoirs) and simpler and simpler approaches to installation (like removing tracking) will become attractive. These effects are already apparent. Basically the opposite of what you’re predicting?

hnaccount_rng 1y ago
Installation costs dominate largely due to one-off things (getting the contractor/customer, roof access, adapting to bespoke roof layout, etc) which are disproportionately larger for smaller installation sizes. However for new construction those things are essentially free. So yes, I’d absolutely expect that solar will be added during larger rebuilds. But that is not an effective way of “deploying solar”
jillesvangurp 1y ago
> I don’t see the logic? You use the surface area you have. Most people simply don't have a lot of ground to put solar on but they might have a roof. Also, you don't just need solar panels but also the wires to where the power is needed. On the roof of the building where you are using the power is just about as close as you can get with that. Otherwise it's a simple economic equation. If installing solar saves enough money such that you end up with a decent return on investment then making that investment is more optimal than not making that investment. That's why most of Australia is running on rooftop solar when the sun is shining. The US is a bit behind on that mostly because the US has a lot of rules stacked in favor of grid providers. Australia used to have that and eventually the grid providers lost that battle.

by derriz 1y ago

hnaccount_rng 1y ago

Installation costs dominate largely due to one-off things (getting the contractor/customer, roof access, adapting to bespoke roof layout, etc) which are disproportionately larger for smaller installation sizes. However for new construction those things are essentially free. So yes, I’d absolutely expect that solar will be added during larger rebuilds. But that is not an effective way of “deploying solar”

jillesvangurp 1y ago

> I don’t see the logic? You use the surface area you have. Most people simply don't have a lot of ground to put solar on but they might have a roof. Also, you don't just need solar panels but also the wires to where the power is needed. On the roof of the building where you are using the power is just about as close as you can get with that. Otherwise it's a simple economic equation. If installing solar saves enough money such that you end up with a decent return on investment then making that investment is more optimal than not making that investment. That's why most of Australia is running on rooftop solar when the sun is shining. The US is a bit behind on that mostly because the US has a lot of rules stacked in favor of grid providers. Australia used to have that and eventually the grid providers lost that battle.