Solar panel farms

[DC Tom]

On 4/24/2019 at 7:47 PM, RochesterRob said:

WHAM 13 had a report about a proposed solar panel farm over 1000 acres in the towns of Rush and Caledonia south of Rochester.  Just wondering about opinions here on this board.  Not against solar panels but wonder if they should be so concentrated?  I don't live in either town so not a case of NIMBY-ism.  Seems to me that the Southern Tier might be a good location for the majority as the population density is far less than the Rochester metro.  Care would have to given to the surroundings there as well.  Not a tree hugger but worry about certain animals being vulnerable.  Thoughts?

 

Concentration achieves some economy of scale.  Panels generate DC current, which for use would have to be converted to AC by an inverter.  Distribute the panels, and you need a large number of smaller inverters.  Co-locate them, and you can use larger and fewer, which reduces both setup costs and maintenance costs.

[WhoTom]

1 hour ago, \GoBillsInDallas/ said:

Several years ago, I actually thought about installing solar panels on our house. I asked a friend of mine (who is a builder) and he laughed at me, and then showed me numbers that said that the panels would never pay for themselves.

 

His reasoning was something like this.

• If you install panels on your house, you also have to install a new roof at the same time.
• Solar panels only work during the warmer months, when the sun is high enough in the sky.
• Optimistically, solar panels would save me about 33% on my electric bill during the 5 months of warm weather here in Texas (mid-May to mid-October).
• If my electric bill were $300/month for those five months, then I would save about $500 per year in electric bills.
• It would cost about $15,000 to install panels on my roof.
• Working backwards on the numbers, it would then take me 30 years just to break even.

 

 

Prices have fallen dramatically since then. These days, the payback period is between 7 and 15 years, depending on location and electric rates. There's also the option of a PPA (Power Purchase Agreement) which costs you nothing up front.

 

https://www.seia.org/research-resources/solar-power-purchase-agreements

 

 

 

[\GoBillsInDallas/]

22 minutes ago, WhoTom said:

These days, the payback period is between 7 and 15 years

 

I'm not an accountant, but taking 15 years to break even doesn't exactly seem like a financial windfall.

[apuszczalowski]

They money in it up here was with a government program and the amount of money they paid to you to buy back the unused power generated. People would install them, and not even use the power generated so it would be sold back into the grid because they paid you more for what you generated then the Hydro company sold it to you for. There were companys going around that were getting into the program and would go door to door in neighborhoods to 'lease' your roof space and allow them to install panels on them for a monthy fee. Farmers were building big accessory buildings on their property so they could get additional roof space to install more panels.

 

Cost for the Chinese panels are getting better, but still not enough for the majority of people to want to install them without getting some kind of incentive from the government to do so.

[WhoTom]

4 hours ago, \GoBillsInDallas/ said:

Several years ago, I actually thought about installing solar panels on our house. I asked a friend of mine (who is a builder) and he laughed at me, and then showed me numbers that said that the panels would never pay for themselves.

1

 

2 hours ago, \GoBillsInDallas/ said:

 

I'm not an accountant, but taking 15 years to break even doesn't exactly seem like a financial windfall.

 

I'm not an accountant either, but I know that 15 years is less than never.

 

[Your Brown Eye]

Caledonia is a dumpy small town, they can have the solar panel farms. 

[Bray Wyatt]

I thought I heard that the materials needed to make the panels causes harm to the environment 

[sherpa]

"Farms" aside, and I can't believe the solar yield in Western NY justifies the cost without some other influence, on a domestic basis it's simple cost vs benefit.

I've been following this industry for years. The house I currently had built and live in has a garage that points true south,  the roof is stressed for solar panels and the slope is very close to our latitude, which is what you want.  The stressing only required additional joists bonded together, and I think it only cost me a few hundred bucks.

The issue is that absent government incentives, which have diminished significantly, it still isn't worth it from a purely financial standpoint.

 I  built a 30x40 barn last year, and even with minimal electrical requirements, it is still more efficient to purchase a very small gas generator rather than solar power the thing.

[Foxx]

5 hours ago, \GoBillsInDallas/ said:

Several years ago, I actually thought about installing solar panels on our house. I asked a friend of mine (who is a builder) and he laughed at me, and then showed me numbers that said that the panels would never pay for themselves.

 

His reasoning was something like this.

• If you install panels on your house, you also have to install a new roof at the same time.
• Solar panels only work during the warmer months, when the sun is high enough in the sky.
• Optimistically, solar panels would save me about 33% on my electric bill during the 5 months of warm weather here in Texas (mid-May to mid-October).
• If my electric bill were $300/month for those five months, then I would save about $500 per year in electric bills.
• It would cost about $15,000 to install panels on my roof.
• Working backwards on the numbers, it would then take me 30 years just to break even.

 

 

i have had my panels installed for over three years now and i love them. 

 

with the incentive programs from the federal government and NYS, along with a NYSERDA grant, they are very affordable. you get 5 years to recoup the incentives from both NYS and the fed gov via your tax filings. the NYSERDA grant is just that, a grant so it just lowers your outlay. as I said, i have had them for three years now and this past year i have recouped the last of the incentives from .gov. what this means is that in another 3 years, i will have completely recouped my initial outlay and will have at least 19 years of free electric going forward. because of the system, it produces all the energy i use on a yearly basis. if by chance it over produces, i get a refund check once a year.

 

 

5 hours ago, DC Tom said:

 

Concentration achieves some economy of scale.  Panels generate DC current, which for use would have to be converted to AC by an inverter.  Distribute the panels, and you need a large number of smaller inverters.  Co-locate them, and you can use larger and fewer, which reduces both setup costs and maintenance costs.

this is what you want. a micro-inverter with each panel. with this method you are not subjecting a central inverter to high load and high heat.  this allows you to run the panels in a parallel circuit instead of a series circuit as well.

Edited April 26, 2019 by Foxx

[WhoTom]

1 hour ago, Bray Wyatt said:

I thought I heard that the materials needed to make the panels causes harm to the environment 

 

FAR less damage than the harm caused by fossil fuels.

 

No technology is completely benign; the key is to minimize the damage.

 

 

[Warcodered]

On 4/24/2019 at 8:30 PM, Tiberius said:

I was just in Wyoming county and they have miles and miles of wind farms already. Really crazy to drive through. Nothing but cows, farms and giant windmills.

Wind has always been an abundant resource of ours.

[BUFFALOKIE]

6 hours ago, \GoBillsInDallas/ said:

 

I'm not an accountant, but taking 15 years to break even doesn't exactly seem like a financial windfall.

I am faced with a similar conundrum. I NEED to replace both HVAC systems in my home -the upstairs unit quit three years ago and the downstairs unit is hanging by a thread.

 

$17,000 for a pair of lower end systems. Double that at a minimum for the highest efficiency systems.

 

I have installed window units in the meantime and I need one more window unit to completely negate the NEED for central air conditioning. (It is Hot as Hades here in the summer, BTW).

 

$17,000 to save $100-$150 per month is a hard pill to swallow now, but I will have to replace it all before I sell the home, whenever that may be, and if I wait until I sell I will have received zero benefit from the purchase.

 

Solar panels are BS in my opinion, for now. The GREEN cost to manufacture in terms of GREEN energy  far outweigh their benefit to mother earth, not to mention the economic comparison to my situation above.

 

 

Edited April 26, 2019 by BUFFALOKIE

[BUFFALOKIE]

Wind farms on the other hand, which are plentiful nowadays across the southern plains, seem very effective. No exotic, toxic materials required.

[SoTier]

14 hours ago, BUFFALOKIE said:

Wind farms on the other hand, which are plentiful nowadays across the southern plains, seem very effective. No exotic, toxic materials required.

 

Unless you dislike them and then they cause all kinds of health issues ...

[/dev/null]

On 4/26/2019 at 3:28 PM, WhoTom said:

 

FAR less damage than the harm caused by fossil fuels.

 

No technology is completely benign; the key is to minimize the damage.

 

 

 

And sometimes the new technology is worse than the problem it claims to solve

 

http://brusselstimes.com/business/technology/15050/electric-vehicles-emit-more-co2-than-diesel-ones,-german-study-shows