The 12 year loans are where people can usually jump in with zero down but as noted people do usually move out before they can realize the actual investment. The tax credit helps for sure, but the price point is definitely a barrier to entry for the vast majority of people. Even then, not all homes have good roofs, some are in the shade, people fail credit, tons of variables when attempting to make a sale. I do my best to limit the variables but you cannot win them all. I'm a huge advocate for solar but with FL's low electricity rates and high energy usage (especially in the summer) doing a 100% offset is too costly for the majority of people who actually have a home that meets all the qualifications.
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Why are solar companies going out of business
- Thread starter Merrill
- Start date
-
- Tags
- Energy Environment Policy
nwdiver
Well-Known Member
Also 100% unnecessary. I understand the attraction of never having an electric bill but not the obsession. With some people it's $0 or nothing. So I'll save $400/mo... but STILL have a $20 bill? No thx.... ?????
Chopr147
Active Member
I'm not getting your math here. 20k in my pocket from solar installation after 12 years? This is not what you mean right? I was talking about 12 years to break even and then the gravy train starts. It's just way too long unless you plan on staying forever. And even then, things change, life has a way of doing that.
brucet999
Active Member
Where? In sunny SoCal, where PV generation is greatest and average electricity cost may run from $0.24 to $0.36 per kWh, or in some northern climate with many cloudy days and electric rates around $0.11 per kWh?
Beware of overly generalized assertions.
and the vast majority of homes do not have the room to install a system that could offer a 100% offset.
you are at least cognizant of the reality you face trying to sell these systems.
IMHO the best prospects solar sales people should focus on is new construction where the owners can fold the costs into the construction costs.
nwdiver
Well-Known Member
Average solar insolation in the US of ~4.5 full hours/day, $0.12/kWh & $3/w before 30% FTC.
A 8kW system will generate ~$19k worth of electricity on average in the US over 12 years. A LOT more in NM... less in WA. The cost after FTC would be ~$17k. Materials cost is ~$8k.
On that point at least we can agree... if you're spreading the cost over 15 or 30 years at ~4% you're saving money on day 1.
brucet999
Active Member
The system in your example is returning 9.3% tax free on the investment assuming, improbably, that homeowners' electricity rates never rise. If one is taking money from savings, stocks or mutual funds, the alternative investment would have to earn at least 11.5%. Not many people get returns anything like that on their investments.
Racerx22b
@unplggdd on Instagram
The AC units functioned. But functioned poorly. The duct work from builder was crap and the units were not sufficient for my sq/ft. They blew capacitors on the reg. They were garbage. As for justification. See above. But frankly, it's none of your freakin business. Just like hardly anyone on here can justify buying a $100k+ car in beta format. Sometimes we just do things cause we want to.
Clearly you'll never be sold on solar. You're so anti solar I question why you even come to this part of the forum for any purpose other than to troll.
Or maybe you're one of those people that only makes the right decisions all the time and your decisions automatically mean they're right for everyone else in the world.
Piss off.
bkp_duke
Well-Known Member
nwdiver
Well-Known Member
How did you make the solar thermal system pencil out? Especially since you spend time away... you can't export excess heat.
I readily admit .... I have not read all of the comments.
Here is my take:
To reap the most benefits of solar ... you must live in the south, and especially the southwest where most days are sunny.
You should see the very large arrays (many, many acres) around Las Vegas. I know that Albuquerque is one of the prime solar locations in America .... Arizona, and California as well. There is a large array near my sons home in northern Utah ...... it is covered with snow virtually all winter. I once lived in New England ... and there are insufficient solar days to justify the initial cost.
Second ... even today, it was announced that one major electrical distributor is considering raising the electric rates on homes with solar .... because they are not (can't recall the exact words) not sufficiently participating on the infrastructure cost.
A side note:
Some years ago I was asked by my employer to explore a hot-water heating collector system in the mid-Atlantic area. The project was not funded mainly because our consulting engineers estimated the "life-cycle cost" at 35 years.
I think hot-water systems are no longer thought desirable because it was a complicated system; required glycol to keep from freezing in the winter; heat-exchanges so as to not contaminate the water (boiler in our situation).
Here is my take:
To reap the most benefits of solar ... you must live in the south, and especially the southwest where most days are sunny.
You should see the very large arrays (many, many acres) around Las Vegas. I know that Albuquerque is one of the prime solar locations in America .... Arizona, and California as well. There is a large array near my sons home in northern Utah ...... it is covered with snow virtually all winter. I once lived in New England ... and there are insufficient solar days to justify the initial cost.
Second ... even today, it was announced that one major electrical distributor is considering raising the electric rates on homes with solar .... because they are not (can't recall the exact words) not sufficiently participating on the infrastructure cost.
A side note:
Some years ago I was asked by my employer to explore a hot-water heating collector system in the mid-Atlantic area. The project was not funded mainly because our consulting engineers estimated the "life-cycle cost" at 35 years.
I think hot-water systems are no longer thought desirable because it was a complicated system; required glycol to keep from freezing in the winter; heat-exchanges so as to not contaminate the water (boiler in our situation).
SageBrush
REJECT Fascism
No that simple, because sun radiation is also related to altitude and panel efficiency is reduced with heat.
My panels at 6200 feet in Colorado are the cats's meow.
But 'best' is somewhat besides the point. The lion's share of the lower 48 US states can install residential PV and pay lower lifetime rates than the utility offers.
nwdiver
Well-Known Member
nwdiver
Well-Known Member
If you're not in a position that a layoff is likely the risk is incredibly low. If you want diversification in your portfolio solar PV can be a great way to do that. There's already a 1st home purchase exemption... it would be nice if there was a Solar PV exemption too. The cost of a PV system is typically <20% of their 401k for people that have one.
Cash is the best option but a 401k loan is certainly better than not getting PV if your roof can support it. We all need to do our part... especially when it's so cost effective.
And if you lose your job.... you might end up using your 401k to pay the electric bill anyway......
Chopr147
Active Member
Have to disagree here. England has been big in solar the last few year in addition to the wind farms. No-one would call England a sunny paradise.
I am on Long Island NY and yes the winter months are not as conducive to solar but my electricity costs me about $150 a YEAR!
Similar threads
