7 ms·

Wrong, solar is cheap and probably the cheapest energy source a household can get if they have a sunny roof. Source - I have solar, have done the math.

Spivak 1y ago
It's not ideal for everyone's situation but it's damn cheap. One of my neighbors has solar panels, no battery or storage of any kind, we don't have net metering here, and their electric bill is single digits.
bfeynman 1y ago
Is this if you just do the entire setup yourself? I'm pretty sure the math on solar currently is quite bad for the vast majority of people in the USA.
- garciasn 1y ago
  I had it priced out by 5 different vendors. Only one of those 5 was in any way truthful about the reality for my particular home: "you will likely only get 15% of what others with panels might due to the shape of your roof and tree cover now and especially in 10 years." That said, WITH grid-kickbacks (all of which are not at all guaranteed), according to 4 of them, I would be looking at a net zero cost in 30-36 years. I'm not even talking about the fact that panels MAY act like a pool for resale. Some people DO want them--again depending on your locale--most, at this point, do NOT where I live. I was looking primarily for cost reduction and a very small percentage of saving the environment or whatever you want to call it. But; depending on your locale, home structure, etc, solar may not at all be that. If you're leaning more on the side of energy independence and eco-friendliness, maybe it's a better fit for you.
  - quickthrowman 1y ago
    > I'm not even talking about the fact that panels MAY act like a pool for resale. Some people DO want them--again depending on your locale--most, at this point, do NOT where I live. A roof mounted solar array easily adds $20,000 - 25,000 to reroofing a house just in labor (assuming two electricians for one week on either side of the reroofing with labor priced at $150/hr) If I was buying a house with a solar array on the roof I would consider it to be a liability that is going to add to the TCO of the home and ask for a discount to cover the future costs of removal. The labor to remove and replace the solar array when reroofing is never going to be paid for by the solar array, it’s just an added expense to the TCO of a home. There are plenty of people who are not aware of the added costs of a roof mounted solar array, I just happen to be aware since I sell and run electrical work for a living.
    - alextingle 1y ago
      > A roof mounted solar array easily adds $20,000 - 25,000 to reroofing a house just in labor (assuming two electricians for one week on either side of the reroofing with labor priced at $150/hr) Why do you need two electricians for a week? My rooftop solar array went up in an afternoon. They had three labourers. The (singular) electrician came in separately and worked for under and hour.
      - bfeynman 1y ago
        reroofing means disassembling and reassembling. You need to deconstruct, put the new roof on, then add the solar back.
        alextingle 1y ago
        The quoted cost of wasn't for the re-roofing, it was in addition to the re-roofing: > "[solar] adds $20,000 - 25,000 to reroofing a house" Since all of the scaffolding or whatever is already up for the roof work, if anything the solar ought to be cheaper, in that scenario.
    - adgjlsfhk1 1y ago
      the cost to remove isn't 2 electricians for a week, it's 2 people with arms for a day. This is like saying that you would consider light fixtures a considerable TCO increase because whenever the lightbulb goes out, you'll need to pay an electrician for a day of work to change it.
  - hristov 1y ago
    So wait, what you are saying is that a rooftop solar array may be a bad deal if your roof is not sunny? Wow hold the presses.
- ben_w 1y ago
  If so, please ask your representatives to copy Germany's "Balkonkraftwerk" rules. We've got one, cost €350 including delivery and a balcony railing mounting kit, could've been €250 if we'd collected and not had the stands. Whole thing is trivial DIY, no skill or training needed: you literally just assemble the kit and plug it into a power socket, register it online as a small power station, and you're done. Sure, the legal limit of 800 W output sure isn't a huge supply, but at that cost it's also a no-brainer — at €350, it will pay for itself in 1y8m.
  - bdisl 1y ago
    Damn, I've looked at it on Google and it's such an eyesore.
    - DocTomoe 1y ago
      So are lawn flamingos - with the notable difference that Balkonkraftwerke actually do something useful.
      - bdisl 1y ago
        With the notable difference that lawn flamingos are not necessary because of the terrible energy policies of the government, whilst balkonkartoffel are. In other words you have lawn flamingos because you have bad taste not because the government impoverished you.
        ben_w 1y ago
        "Eyesore" is in your own opinion. What I've seen on balconies around here, anything covering them is a 50% chance of being an improvement — and unlike some acquaintances, I've not encountered balkon-FKK. And IMO they're a big improvement over, e.g. the AC units on the skyscraper walls of Manhatten. I have balkonkraftwerk because they're a 60% return on investment, per year for 35 years, tax free and self-adjusting for inflation. By far the best (reliable) investment one can make. That €350 is currently economically worth €7350 over their lifetime in reduced energy bills, tax free. The economics are so strong that it would be worth doing even if energy was 1/3rd the current price.
- philipkglass 1y ago
  American rooftop solar power has much higher costs than in Australia: https://reneweconomy.com.au/rooftop-solar-three-times-cheaper-to-install-in-australia-than-us-canada/ https://reneweconomy.com.au/rooftop-solar-three-times-cheape... The study from Compare the Market finds the average residential solar installation cost in the US is $A4/W, while Canada’s national average was $A3.65/W. By contrast, Australia’s national average was $A0.89/W, more than $A2/W cheaper. It's also significantly higher than in Germany: https://www.pv-magazine.com/2024/10/24/residential-pv-prices-in-germany-drop-25-within-12-months/ https://www.pv-magazine.com/2024/10/24/residential-pv-prices... The cheapest offers for a PV system with 10 kW of power without storage are just over €1 per watt, the most expensive are around €2 euros per watt. All these countries have access to the same solar panels. The national minimum wage is lower in America than in the other countries. So why do American rooftop systems cost so much more? Mostly because of high "soft costs" in America: Soft costs are the non-hardware costs associated with going solar. These costs include permitting, financing, and installing solar, as well as the expenses solar companies incur to acquire new customers, pay suppliers, and cover their bottom line. These soft costs become a portion of the overall price a customer pays for a solar energy system. While solar hardware costs have fallen in recent years, soft costs represent a growing share of total solar system costs. https://www.energy.gov/eere/solar/solar-soft-costs-basics https://www.energy.gov/eere/solar/solar-soft-costs-basics
  - hristov 1y ago
    First of all your post is off topic. Second of all, the reason why solar panel installations in both Australia and Germany are cheaper than the US is solar panel tariffs. Neither Australia nor the EU has solar panel tariffs. The US does. The cheapest solar panels come from China, where there is significant overproduction of panels. If you do not have tariffs you get a lot of cheap Chinese panels.
    - deleted 1y ago
      [deleted]
at-fates-hands 1y ago
I live in Minnesota, we get about 34% less sun than most of the southern states like Arizona or Florida. Arizona - 3,800 hours of sunlight hours per year Minnesota - 2,500 hours of sunlight hours per year Ergo, I can't generate as much energy as someone who lives in a state that gets significantly more sunlight. I would also add that setup and installation of even a small solar array has an ROI of around 10 years because I can't generate as much energy, therefore it takes longer for me to break even. Right now in Minnesota: The average cost of installing a 5 kW solar panel system in Minnesota is approximately $14,900 before applying the 30% federal tax credit, which can significantly reduce the overall expense. After incentives, the out-of-pocket cost can be around $13,860 Sorry, I'm not going to lay out 15K and then have to wait ten years before I break even. If you want to know why people aren't adopting solar, this is the reason. Its cost prohibitive for many, many people. Does it make sense for people in those Southern states? 100%. For everybody else? Not so much.
- deleted 1y ago
  [deleted]
- mstachowiak 1y ago
  You can finance the purchase to avoid upfront payments. And in many cases, the energy savings exceed the finance payments, resulting in a net monthly gain from a cash flow basis with no upfront payment.
  - gregbot 1y ago
    Im pretty sure if that were a common situation more people would have rooftop solar and there wouldn’t need to be subsidies for it.
    - igor47 1y ago
      Are you assuming people are rational, informed, and interested? Strong assumptions. I recommend doing a little research vs going off the vibes
tharmas 1y ago
Not only that, the demand from AI Data Centers is going to push up the price of electricity tremendously. Add in demand from electric vehicles too and there could be shortages as well. Who knows, but one thing is certain: demand for electricity is going to skyrocket. Having an alternative source for your house is a wise idea.
- gregbot 1y ago
  Wouldn’t it just make more sense to use nuclear and keep the grid reliable so individual homeowners don’t need to worry about huge blackouts ruining their quality of life?
  - tharmas 1y ago
    Nuclear is very expensive to build. It takes a long time to build. Also, it takes quite a bit of time to power up and power down a nuclear power plant. Nuclear plants use a lot of water. Water that could be used to cool the AI hardware. As a result nuclear power isn't cheap. Then there is still the safety issues and environmental concerns regarding the waste. Some people say they are safe now and you can just bury the waste deep underground. Putting it deep underground seems a bit like just pumping the carbon into the air: someone else's problem further down the line in time. Do you want to live next to a Nuclear Power Plant?
    - gregbot 1y ago
      >Do you want to live next to a Nuclear Power Plant? Yes! I think that would be great!
  - boringg 1y ago
    Yes more nuclear does not inhibit solar. More of both option is the winning salvo.
- boringg 1y ago
  Don't worry the utilities will still make sure you pay their fees. Watch the markets move from paying per kwh or demand charges to just straight up fees. Its disheartening.
DocTomoe 1y ago
Having solar myself, I completely agree with you that solar is - comparatively - cheap. But because it is cheap, the argument goes that you don't really need to subsidy it.
- jakelazaroff 1y ago
  The subsidies probably cost significantly less than we'll end up paying for whatever effects of climate change they would have averted.
  - ben_w 1y ago
    Yes, but if everyone was going to get them anyway, you might as well use the same money for something else, like free school lunches. Will they actually get spent on something sensible, including but not limited to free school lunches? Probably not. Think of it as a stopped-clock-right-twice-a-day kind of thing.
- hristov 1y ago
  There are many reasons for subsidies and it is a complex field. I was not discussing subsidies I was replying to a flat out false statement that solar is very expensive. When discussing solar subsidies one should keep several things in mind: - Federal solar subsidies are expiring at the end of this year thanks to Trumps tax law with a name so ridiculous I shall not repeat it. - This news item is talking about money that has already been granted. This is especially screwed up because these are situation where the government has already promised to pay and people have been making investments and putting in work in expectation of payment. - Solar is actually much less subsidized than nuclear. In many cases solar subsidies will help the taxpayer avoid costs as they avoid much more expensive nuclear subsidies.

Spivak 1y ago

It's not ideal for everyone's situation but it's damn cheap. One of my neighbors has solar panels, no battery or storage of any kind, we don't have net metering here, and their electric bill is single digits.

bfeynman 1y ago

Is this if you just do the entire setup yourself? I'm pretty sure the math on solar currently is quite bad for the vast majority of people in the USA.

garciasn 1y ago
I had it priced out by 5 different vendors. Only one of those 5 was in any way truthful about the reality for my particular home: "you will likely only get 15% of what others with panels might due to the shape of your roof and tree cover now and especially in 10 years." That said, WITH grid-kickbacks (all of which are not at all guaranteed), according to 4 of them, I would be looking at a net zero cost in 30-36 years. I'm not even talking about the fact that panels MAY act like a pool for resale. Some people DO want them--again depending on your locale--most, at this point, do NOT where I live. I was looking primarily for cost reduction and a very small percentage of saving the environment or whatever you want to call it. But; depending on your locale, home structure, etc, solar may not at all be that. If you're leaning more on the side of energy independence and eco-friendliness, maybe it's a better fit for you.
- quickthrowman 1y ago
  > I'm not even talking about the fact that panels MAY act like a pool for resale. Some people DO want them--again depending on your locale--most, at this point, do NOT where I live. A roof mounted solar array easily adds $20,000 - 25,000 to reroofing a house just in labor (assuming two electricians for one week on either side of the reroofing with labor priced at $150/hr) If I was buying a house with a solar array on the roof I would consider it to be a liability that is going to add to the TCO of the home and ask for a discount to cover the future costs of removal. The labor to remove and replace the solar array when reroofing is never going to be paid for by the solar array, it’s just an added expense to the TCO of a home. There are plenty of people who are not aware of the added costs of a roof mounted solar array, I just happen to be aware since I sell and run electrical work for a living.
  - alextingle 1y ago
    > A roof mounted solar array easily adds $20,000 - 25,000 to reroofing a house just in labor (assuming two electricians for one week on either side of the reroofing with labor priced at $150/hr) Why do you need two electricians for a week? My rooftop solar array went up in an afternoon. They had three labourers. The (singular) electrician came in separately and worked for under and hour.
    - bfeynman 1y ago
      reroofing means disassembling and reassembling. You need to deconstruct, put the new roof on, then add the solar back.
      - alextingle 1y ago
        The quoted cost of wasn't for the re-roofing, it was in addition to the re-roofing: > "[solar] adds $20,000 - 25,000 to reroofing a house" Since all of the scaffolding or whatever is already up for the roof work, if anything the solar ought to be cheaper, in that scenario.
  - adgjlsfhk1 1y ago
    the cost to remove isn't 2 electricians for a week, it's 2 people with arms for a day. This is like saying that you would consider light fixtures a considerable TCO increase because whenever the lightbulb goes out, you'll need to pay an electrician for a day of work to change it.
- hristov 1y ago
  So wait, what you are saying is that a rooftop solar array may be a bad deal if your roof is not sunny? Wow hold the presses.
ben_w 1y ago
If so, please ask your representatives to copy Germany's "Balkonkraftwerk" rules. We've got one, cost €350 including delivery and a balcony railing mounting kit, could've been €250 if we'd collected and not had the stands. Whole thing is trivial DIY, no skill or training needed: you literally just assemble the kit and plug it into a power socket, register it online as a small power station, and you're done. Sure, the legal limit of 800 W output sure isn't a huge supply, but at that cost it's also a no-brainer — at €350, it will pay for itself in 1y8m.
- bdisl 1y ago
  Damn, I've looked at it on Google and it's such an eyesore.
  - DocTomoe 1y ago
    So are lawn flamingos - with the notable difference that Balkonkraftwerke actually do something useful.
    - bdisl 1y ago
      With the notable difference that lawn flamingos are not necessary because of the terrible energy policies of the government, whilst balkonkartoffel are. In other words you have lawn flamingos because you have bad taste not because the government impoverished you.
      - ben_w 1y ago
        "Eyesore" is in your own opinion. What I've seen on balconies around here, anything covering them is a 50% chance of being an improvement — and unlike some acquaintances, I've not encountered balkon-FKK. And IMO they're a big improvement over, e.g. the AC units on the skyscraper walls of Manhatten. I have balkonkraftwerk because they're a 60% return on investment, per year for 35 years, tax free and self-adjusting for inflation. By far the best (reliable) investment one can make. That €350 is currently economically worth €7350 over their lifetime in reduced energy bills, tax free. The economics are so strong that it would be worth doing even if energy was 1/3rd the current price.
philipkglass 1y ago
American rooftop solar power has much higher costs than in Australia: https://reneweconomy.com.au/rooftop-solar-three-times-cheaper-to-install-in-australia-than-us-canada/ https://reneweconomy.com.au/rooftop-solar-three-times-cheape... The study from Compare the Market finds the average residential solar installation cost in the US is $A4/W, while Canada’s national average was $A3.65/W. By contrast, Australia’s national average was $A0.89/W, more than $A2/W cheaper. It's also significantly higher than in Germany: https://www.pv-magazine.com/2024/10/24/residential-pv-prices-in-germany-drop-25-within-12-months/ https://www.pv-magazine.com/2024/10/24/residential-pv-prices... The cheapest offers for a PV system with 10 kW of power without storage are just over €1 per watt, the most expensive are around €2 euros per watt. All these countries have access to the same solar panels. The national minimum wage is lower in America than in the other countries. So why do American rooftop systems cost so much more? Mostly because of high "soft costs" in America: Soft costs are the non-hardware costs associated with going solar. These costs include permitting, financing, and installing solar, as well as the expenses solar companies incur to acquire new customers, pay suppliers, and cover their bottom line. These soft costs become a portion of the overall price a customer pays for a solar energy system. While solar hardware costs have fallen in recent years, soft costs represent a growing share of total solar system costs. https://www.energy.gov/eere/solar/solar-soft-costs-basics https://www.energy.gov/eere/solar/solar-soft-costs-basics
- hristov 1y ago
  First of all your post is off topic. Second of all, the reason why solar panel installations in both Australia and Germany are cheaper than the US is solar panel tariffs. Neither Australia nor the EU has solar panel tariffs. The US does. The cheapest solar panels come from China, where there is significant overproduction of panels. If you do not have tariffs you get a lot of cheap Chinese panels.
  - deleted 1y ago
    [deleted]

at-fates-hands 1y ago

I live in Minnesota, we get about 34% less sun than most of the southern states like Arizona or Florida. Arizona - 3,800 hours of sunlight hours per year Minnesota - 2,500 hours of sunlight hours per year Ergo, I can't generate as much energy as someone who lives in a state that gets significantly more sunlight. I would also add that setup and installation of even a small solar array has an ROI of around 10 years because I can't generate as much energy, therefore it takes longer for me to break even. Right now in Minnesota: The average cost of installing a 5 kW solar panel system in Minnesota is approximately $14,900 before applying the 30% federal tax credit, which can significantly reduce the overall expense. After incentives, the out-of-pocket cost can be around $13,860 Sorry, I'm not going to lay out 15K and then have to wait ten years before I break even. If you want to know why people aren't adopting solar, this is the reason. Its cost prohibitive for many, many people. Does it make sense for people in those Southern states? 100%. For everybody else? Not so much.

deleted 1y ago
[deleted]
mstachowiak 1y ago
You can finance the purchase to avoid upfront payments. And in many cases, the energy savings exceed the finance payments, resulting in a net monthly gain from a cash flow basis with no upfront payment.
- gregbot 1y ago
  Im pretty sure if that were a common situation more people would have rooftop solar and there wouldn’t need to be subsidies for it.
  - igor47 1y ago
    Are you assuming people are rational, informed, and interested? Strong assumptions. I recommend doing a little research vs going off the vibes

tharmas 1y ago

Not only that, the demand from AI Data Centers is going to push up the price of electricity tremendously. Add in demand from electric vehicles too and there could be shortages as well. Who knows, but one thing is certain: demand for electricity is going to skyrocket. Having an alternative source for your house is a wise idea.

gregbot 1y ago
Wouldn’t it just make more sense to use nuclear and keep the grid reliable so individual homeowners don’t need to worry about huge blackouts ruining their quality of life?
- tharmas 1y ago
  Nuclear is very expensive to build. It takes a long time to build. Also, it takes quite a bit of time to power up and power down a nuclear power plant. Nuclear plants use a lot of water. Water that could be used to cool the AI hardware. As a result nuclear power isn't cheap. Then there is still the safety issues and environmental concerns regarding the waste. Some people say they are safe now and you can just bury the waste deep underground. Putting it deep underground seems a bit like just pumping the carbon into the air: someone else's problem further down the line in time. Do you want to live next to a Nuclear Power Plant?
  - gregbot 1y ago
    >Do you want to live next to a Nuclear Power Plant? Yes! I think that would be great!
- boringg 1y ago
  Yes more nuclear does not inhibit solar. More of both option is the winning salvo.
boringg 1y ago
Don't worry the utilities will still make sure you pay their fees. Watch the markets move from paying per kwh or demand charges to just straight up fees. Its disheartening.

DocTomoe 1y ago

Having solar myself, I completely agree with you that solar is - comparatively - cheap. But because it is cheap, the argument goes that you don't really need to subsidy it.

jakelazaroff 1y ago
The subsidies probably cost significantly less than we'll end up paying for whatever effects of climate change they would have averted.
- ben_w 1y ago
  Yes, but if everyone was going to get them anyway, you might as well use the same money for something else, like free school lunches. Will they actually get spent on something sensible, including but not limited to free school lunches? Probably not. Think of it as a stopped-clock-right-twice-a-day kind of thing.
hristov 1y ago
There are many reasons for subsidies and it is a complex field. I was not discussing subsidies I was replying to a flat out false statement that solar is very expensive. When discussing solar subsidies one should keep several things in mind: - Federal solar subsidies are expiring at the end of this year thanks to Trumps tax law with a name so ridiculous I shall not repeat it. - This news item is talking about money that has already been granted. This is especially screwed up because these are situation where the government has already promised to pay and people have been making investments and putting in work in expectation of payment. - Solar is actually much less subsidized than nuclear. In many cases solar subsidies will help the taxpayer avoid costs as they avoid much more expensive nuclear subsidies.