Here in Arizona the electric power company started charging customers a $50 fee for having Solar panels. The power company claims it costs them money to buy the excess power, they have to pay employees to deal with this, it is not free. Solar companies here will install the solar panels on your house FREE. Your roof is a place for the solar company to keep their panels. To make a long story short solar companies make it sound good to the customer but in the end the customer does not get much out of this deal.
You get 200 BTUs per sq ft of heat from the sun. NO way you can get close to 200 BTUs with electric panels.
Solar City offered to put FREE solar panels on my roof, 7600 watts of panels. Solar city gets the government rebate, they get all the electricity $$$ the power company buys from the panels. Only thing I get is free electricity from what they call, excess power.
Now the neighbors house is For Sale but they cannot sell it because the solar system does not work. Legal contract says, the home owner can not remove the solar panels from the roof.
Looks like a 1 yr deferred cost bill.
Too much power consumed at peak price as well, could use better insulation.
For example, if you consume 100 units in a particular month and also generated 150 units during the same month then the extra 50 units wouldn't really account for anything.
I think KISS's estimates are valid, just need to multiply by PV efficacy of 15% to 22% depending optical bandwidth if it includes IR and steerable PV * number of sunhours per month.Thank you, everyone.
I had grid-tie inverter system in mind because I believe that the concept of reverse metering makes it batter than a solar PV system with battery backup.
In California, as I have heard, things are quite different. I think that in California the consumers with PV panels will benefit because of reverse metering. For example, their solar panels will produce electricity during the day and it will reverse the meter reading. Suppose that you used 10 units during the night and during daytime you also generated 10 units then overall you consumed 0 units. Please note that I don't really know how utility buys electricity from a consumer in California. Anyway, someone told me that generating more electricity than you consume on monthly basis wouldn't benefit you. For example, if you consume 100 units in a particular month and also generated 150 units during the same month then the extra 50 units wouldn't really account for anything.
"200 BTUs per hour per sq. ft"?
On a bright sunny day, you might get 1000 W/m^2 (or, 92 W/sq. ft) but I believe that this figure is rather optimistic. Anyway, there are 1055 joules in 1 BTU. 92 (1/1055)*3600/hr./sq. ft. = 314 BTU/hr./sq.ft. I hope that I have it correct.
I would request you to clarify the points above. I believe that you are saying that Solar City gets the government rebates and can buy solar equipment such as solar panels at cheaper prices but I don't get why Solar City gets all the income/benefits generated using those panels. What is that "excess power" which you can get for free?
Why can't your neighbor sell their home with their existing dysfunctional solar system?!
Perhaps, it got deferred to facilitate the installation of solar panels.
Were you referring to this? Please let me know.
Thanks a lot, KISS. I wouldn't make any further queries about your posting because I believe that I have already made enough queries above and you can guide me with them. Thanks.
Regards
PG
Thank you, everyone.
I had grid-tie inverter system in mind because I believe that the concept of reverse metering makes it batter than a solar PV system with battery backup.
In California, as I have heard, things are quite different. I think that in California the consumers with PV panels will benefit because of reverse metering. For example, their solar panels will produce electricity during the day and it will reverse the meter reading. Suppose that you used 10 units during the night and during daytime you also generated 10 units then overall you consumed 0 units. Please note that I don't really know how utility buys electricity from a consumer in California. Anyway, someone told me that generating more electricity than you consume on monthly basis wouldn't benefit you. For example, if you consume 100 units in a particular month and also generated 150 units during the same month then the extra 50 units wouldn't really account for anything.
"200 BTUs per hour per sq. ft"?
On a bright sunny day, you might get 1000 W/m^2 (or, 92 W/sq. ft) but I believe that this figure is rather optimistic. Anyway, there are 1055 joules in 1 BTU. 92 (1/1055)*3600/hr./sq. ft. = 314 BTU/hr./sq.ft. I hope that I have it correct.
I would request you to clarify the points above. I believe that you are saying that Solar City gets the government rebates and can buy solar equipment such as solar panels at cheaper prices but I don't get why Solar City gets all the income/benefits generated using those panels. What is that "excess power" which you can get for free?
Why can't your neighbor sell their home with their existing dysfunctional solar system?!
Perhaps, it got deferred to facilitate the installation of solar panels.
Were you referring to this? Please let me know.
Thanks a lot, KISS. I wouldn't make any further queries about your posting because I believe that I have already made enough queries above and you can guide me with them. Thanks.
Regards
PG
No such thing as a free lunch, if you agree to free $50k installation, then it must be maintained at your expense, unless you prove defects. Otherwise you pay later in legal costs and aggravation.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?