Eager to learn

[zog]

That's a pretty big building. 900,000 square feet is 22.5 acres.

The building is well over a million, but the flat roof over the main warehouse is about 900,000 sq-ft (Not 90,000). Yes, it is a big building.

Looks like I did drop a digit, but I did not do much for calculations, just a WAG based on area of one panel compated to the roof size.

 

[zog]

Some states are considering helping finance PV systems.

It seems to me several states are already financing PV systems, they just do it in a round about typicall sneaky govt way and call them "credits" (SRECs)

First, a survey is done on the property for viability.

If viable, the state will examine electric bills and determine a monthly average. That monthly average will be the payment on a loan from the state to install a PV system. After the loan is paid off, the citizen owns the PV system free and clear and had to pay no money up front.

That is how I assumed it worked but if you read info put out by solar companies this is pretty much a sure thing. Glad to hear it is not and only being done when it makes sense to do so.

That sounds like a great idea, but there will be some problems.

Let's take my place as an example. I have too much shade, so PV is not likely. That will be the same for many. BUT, let's ignore that and just look at the financial aspects.

I live alone, so not only do I use very little energy, I also control it. No bickering in order to get devices not in use turned off. I pay about 65 bucks a month for electricity. I use about 530 kWh per month. By contrast, I know someone in LA with a great job. He lives in a rancher that would be worth about $200,000 here. His electric bill last month was $580. Even worse, he has a solar array that probably lowered the bill by nearly 100 bucks. He used over 3,600 kWh last month. No kidding! He has a pool, a wife and four daughters.

To pay off an interest free $50,000 loan with a 65 dollar a month payment would take 64 years. A smaller system would result in an increase in the electric bill an the idea is for the citizen not to have an electric bill to pay.

PV systems are about 4 times more expensive than they need to be in order to be a big hit with consumers. (Small 'c').

Excellent stuff, and pretty close to what my number crunching says too. The way I see it a combonation of these 3 things has to get 4 times better:
-PV cell efficiency
-Local energy costs from the utility
-Cost of system and installation

Thanks again for your valuable input, it is pretty hard to find someone that really knows what they are talking about and not brain washed by what they are trained to tell potential customers. I think solar is fantastic but is just not ready to be a viable energy solution in most instances. What do you think K8, 5 years, 10 years?

 

[K8MHZ]

It seems to me several states are already financing PV systems, they just do it in a round about typicall sneaky govt way and call them "credits" (SRECs)

That is how I assumed it worked but if you read info put out by solar companies this is pretty much a sure thing. Glad to hear it is not and only being done when it makes sense to do so.



Excellent stuff, and pretty close to what my number crunching says too. The way I see it a combonation of these 3 things has to get 4 times better:
-PV cell efficiency
-Local energy costs from the utility
-Cost of system and installation

Thanks again for your valuable input, it is pretty hard to find someone that really knows what they are talking about and not brain washed by what they are trained to tell potential customers. I think solar is fantastic but is just not ready to be a viable energy solution in most instances. What do you think K8, 5 years, 10 years?

Well, if the efficiency keeps rising and the costs keep dropping like they have been, maybe 5 years.

There will also be a gain in use when used panels and inverters become available. I am convinced that much of the price on new equipment is inflated because they know the customer has no where to buy used equipment.

If we could get 400 watt panels for a hundred bucks and get the inverter costs for 10 kW and lower systems down to the 400 dollar range, there would be waiting lists of customers.

I don't see the above to be too distant in the horizon, but who knows? All it would take would be for some scientific study to determine that solar panels cause cancer in cockroaches that could be transmitted to humans and the entire PV business could come to a screeching halt.

 

[K8MHZ]

Here is something else to consider.......

If solar / wind gets to the point where it provides a substantial amount of energy for the populace, the POCO's will have to charge more and more for each kWh to stay solvent. That will really suck for people with property where solar or wind just won't work.

 

[zog]

Here is something else to consider.......

If solar / wind gets to the point where it provides a substantial amount of energy for the populace, the POCO's will have to charge more and more for each kWh to stay solvent. That will really suck for people with property where solar or wind just won't work.

But the rising costs from the utility would make other sources even more viable, it would snowball?

 

[K8MHZ]

But the rising costs from the utility would make other sources even more viable, it would snowball?

There are still going to be many properties where neither solar nor wind will work. The entire subdivision I live in is like that.

We live in a semi-rural area in an older subdivision with many trees. My half acre of land has about 40 trees on it. There is only appreciable wind in the winter, for most of the year we just get a nice breeze, far less than needed to spin a wind turbine.

I have about 1000 square feet in my back yard that would provide for about a 60 percent shading factor and that is about 150 feet from my house. I am lucky as I have four lots. The single and double lot properties have virtually no unobstructed view of the south.

None of the lake front properties have totally unobstructed views of the south, and the ones on the south side have no view of the south due to the terrain.

Since I am not the Once-ler, I won't cut down my trees. About the only way I will come out ahead with solar is to be paid to be in that business.

My neighbors won't have that option.

 

[zog]

Where are you, Michigan?

 

[jaggedben]

I think solar is fantastic but is just not ready to be a viable energy solution in most instances. What do you think K8, 5 years, 10 years?

As has been said a number of times in this forum, it depends on local conditions where you are. In California PV is already competitive at peak time and higher tier rates. In Michigan it may take a few years, and may never be as good as in other places.

 

[weressl]

If you go here http://www.fatspaniel.com/fat-spaniel-in-action/live-sites/ you can see actual power production from systems all over the place. The also tell you the system size ......... compare the system sizes to the actual output, I think it is very telling.

Whoa Big Brother......

 

[K8MHZ]

Where are you, Michigan?

Yep, where men are men and sheep are nervous.



Egelston Township, Muskegon County to be more precise.

 

[K8MHZ]

As has been said a number of times in this forum, it depends on local conditions where you are. In California PV is already competitive at peak time and higher tier rates. In Michigan it may take a few years, and may never be as good as in other places.

I know a guy that lives in LA. He pays 17 cents per kWh on average and he is in the highest tier. He used over 3,600 kWh last month. His bill was $580.00. He also has a solar array that cuts the bill down by about 70 dollars.

The reason solar is so popular in CA is that they have 111 incentive programs.

http://www.solar-estimate.org/?page=solar-incentives&state=CA

At the time of the writing of the site, Michigan had 3. The only one left is the Federal Tax Credit. Both Consumers Energy and DTE ended their incentive programs and the state never had one.

 

[zog]

Yep, where men are men and sheep are nervous.



Egelston Township, Muskegon County to be more precise.

I figured so, I used to live there too. Michigan might be one of the last states to see a solar boom I think, rough winters, not very strong solar radiation, and pretty low electric rates. Going back to my map in post # 1 the states where solar should make sense seemed obvious to me but I have since learned it is only one of 3 very important factors.

1. kW/M^2/day
2. Local electrica rates
3. Local incentive programs

California makes perfect sense, but the #2 solar state is NJ, which I just don't get. Why so many solar incentives there of all places?

 

[K8MHZ]

I figured so, I used to live there too. Michigan might be one of the last states to see a solar boom I think, rough winters, not very strong solar radiation, and pretty low electric rates. Going back to my map in post # 1 the states where solar should make sense seemed obvious to me but I have since learned it is only one of 3 very important factors.

1. kW/M^2/day
2. Local electrica rates
3. Local incentive programs

California makes perfect sense, but the #2 solar state is NJ, which I just don't get. Why so many solar incentives there of all places?

IIRC, NJ had some of the higher costs per kWh of any of the states. That would be a factor.

 

[zog]

IIRC, NJ had some of the higher costs per kWh of any of the states. That would be a factor.

Yeah, but not crazy high, and not as high as they are now since they started thier SREC program. Utilities keep raising rates to pay for all the credits they have to buy to avoid fines, so they make the customers pay for it. Sort of defeats the whole purpose IMHO.

 

[ron]

....... but the #2 solar state is NJ, which I just don't get. Why so many solar incentives there of all places?

Liberals and tree huggers.

Not to be political, but it is very suave to be pro-solar.

 

[ggunn]

Liberals and tree huggers.

Not to be political, but it is very suave to be pro-solar.

The time to get moving on renewable energy sources is when we can use existing infrastructure as leverage to get RE systems in place by the time they are needed. If we wait until conventional sources are running out and the world is at war over the scraps of what is left, it will be far too late (although some may argue that we are already there). If we wait until RE systems are at parity pricing with conventional energy sources, we will wait forever because it takes the building of a market to bring manufacturing capacity up and prices down.

You can disparage the proponents of Renewable Energy as "liberals" and "tree huggers" if you want, but it is in my opinion a short-sighted viewpoint. The status quo is unsustainable over the long haul.

 

[zog]

The time to get moving on renewable energy sources is when we can use existing infrastructure as leverage to get RE systems in place by the time they are needed. If we wait until conventional sources are running out and the world is at war over the scraps of what is left, it will be far too late (although some may argue that we are already there). If we wait until RE systems are at parity pricing with conventional energy sources, we will wait forever because it takes the building of a market to bring manufacturing capacity up and prices down.

You can disparage the proponents of Renewable Energy as "liberals" and "tree huggers" if you want, but it is in my opinion a short-sighted viewpoint. The status quo is unsustainable over the long haul.

While I agree with your point, the spin our government uses for pushing renewable energy is to reduce our dependency on "forgein oil". Which is a total crock (see chart)

Don't get me wrong, we do need to be investing in cleaner, better power sources, but I think we should be doing it smarter than we are. Conservation is more important than other means of production and is easier (And cheaper) to acomplish, things like a smarter grid can be huge factors, but both are part of the solution.

 

[ron]

You can disparage the proponents of Renewable Energy as "liberals" and "tree huggers" if you want, but it is in my opinion a short-sighted viewpoint. The status quo is unsustainable over the long haul.

My point was a reply to why NJ is offering so many incentives compared to the other 48 states (CA not inlcuded). I don't think there is a technical reason.

 

[ggunn]

While I agree with your point, the spin our government uses for pushing renewable energy is to reduce our dependency on "forgein oil". Which is a total crock (see chart)

Don't get me wrong, we do need to be investing in cleaner, better power sources, but I think we should be doing it smarter than we are. Conservation is more important than other means of production and is easier (And cheaper) to acomplish, things like a smarter grid can be huge factors, but both are part of the solution.

View attachment 5719

I am well aware that solar energy input does not affect oil consumption directly to any appreciable degree, and I am quick to point that out when someone links solar to "foreign oil", but in a larger sense, energy is energy, and we are using up fossil energy millions of times faster than it is being renewed. If we do not start developing renewable sources while we can leverage what existing sources exist to do it, we are in for a very rough road. We are, anyway, but we have to do what we can to ameliorate it.

 

[ggunn]

My point was a reply to why NJ is offering so many incentives compared to the other 48 states (CA not inlcuded). I don't think there is a technical reason.

I didn't think you did, but I take exception to the implication that there is something wrong with people who are renewable energy proponents. "Tree hugger" is not a complimentary term.