Earth Hour is everyone on board?

sorry, but in today's climate, solar is still way too expensive for most homeowners to manage.

the current administration, if they were to pay for (not subsidize) solar installation on each house, whether owned or rented, it would

1) put a HUGE number of people to work for YEARS (estimated to be 50 to 150,000 people initially with potentially another 250,000 to one million people in satellite occupations)

2) immediately start to reduce power consumption off the grid, which would allow its use for other things like ELECTRIC CARS

3) allow people to save money on their power bills, so they will have money TO PAY BACK THE FRICKING NATIONAL DEBT

4) save a huge chunk of money for the fuel we buy, estimated to be 20-50 billion in the first 2 years

cost of this program to outfit EVERY HOUSE IN THE SOUTHERN TIER??

granted, it would take (estimate by one source) 12 to 25 years to complete, so cost would be extended over several years, but if we had to pay for all of the program right now, it would be just slightly more than what the government has spent THIS YEAR. (at todays cost, its around 3.3 trillion, but with estimated cost if this program becomes mainstream, could be as low as 1.2 to 1.8 trillion.... which is what the government GAVE AWAY FOR NOTHING LAST WEEK!!~!)

SO WHAT DO YOU WANT TO DO WITH YOUR MONEY?

 

No it's not! With the already existing State rebates, and Tax credits, a system that would meet 75% of a homes power requirements would cost about 30k or LESS! You don't a want 75% system, buy a little smaller. But do something!

Quit looking for a FREE RIDE! Spending 30k on your home is comprable to a Bathroom remodel job. My neighbor just put in a 6.8 kW system for 28k,TOTAL, after his rebates and Tax credits!! The amount it will add to the resale value of his house will offset the final out of pocket that he put out!

These are all great ideas, START NOW, lets not wait 20 more years or so.

Spend it wisely and add a major improvement to your home, There already is a program in place to help homeowners out.
The "Big O" supposedly has money for Solar, start spending it!

 

omg!!

who said start this project in 20 years?? sure as hell wasnt me. AFAIC, if it take 20 MINUTES to get started that is 19 minutes too long!@!

take a poll of homeowners on your street and tell me how many have an extra $30,000 lying around.

then, take a poll of how many LANDLORDS renting houses now that want to put $30,000 into a house that would primarily benefit the renter??

etc, etc, etc...

then take another poll who wants to pay for some company to pay some IDIOT who caused the company to fail MILLIONS IN BONUSES!!


**edit**

i read an article that looked at ROI for green technology since the ONLY REAL HURDLE IS THE COST OF INSTALLATION, which you seem to think is manageable by most.

they also said the government should pay the entire cost, because they figured for every dollare they spent on the project, they would receive 7 to 25 times their investment back over time in reduced costs to support a multitude of other programs associated with our continuing to use fossil fuels

and that does not consider the incalculable cost of GCC

ok then... if we throw in a tax credit for EXISTING installs, would that make you feel better?

fact of the matter: to sustain a situation, it must run on a sustainable base. so the ONLY real question is

1)NOT is batttery tech good enough

2) is NOT is the range far enough, BEV fast enough, etc, etc etc...

the ONLY real question is....

IS FOSSIL FUEL TECHNOLOGY SUSTAINABLE??

 

Switchboard, from NRDC :: Pete Altman's Blog :: Waxman climate bill will switch on the green jobs

 

You get no arguement outa me on that one!!!

Just in the last year, 4 of my neighbors have followed my lead and invested in Solar!

You factor that cost into the life of the building. You also make the tenants pay a little extra. Since they will no longer have to put out excessive money for power, it will even out.
Hell, I wish EVERYTHING was FREE.
It just don't work like that!

That comment does not even belong in this discussion, it's an Apples & Assholes differance!!! All those "Smart Execs, like Madoff etc, should rot in hell, have ALL their assets siezed!
Completly different problem than Solar debate.


**edit**

Considering all the Remodeling I see going on, yes folks have money. Of course a year ago they had a LOT more money, but see my above comment on that.
What is "ROI"?

There you go again looking for that free ride!!!
I see folks wasting money left and right!
Instead of owning 4 gas hogs, have 3, spend the 4th's money on a Solar Pkg.

I already got my Rebate and Tax credit for my system!!! approx $42k. I would however, like to see an INCREASE in the tax credit.
Keep the rebate program rolling, it's having results.

Don't care about battery's. I generate enough during the day, the night is FREE!

Now I assume your talking about auto's, and NO, THE OIL IS GOING TO RUN OUT.
I would rather be self reliant and do what I am doing.
I bought the Prius, so I would not waste Money and Gas!

I bought the Solar to save power usage costs. I also have cut many kWh's off my yearly usage.
Just found a source of nice Par 20 LED spots, and they are dimmable!
Guess what my next purchase is!!!

 

if autos were the only issue, it would not be as bad... but 70% of the energy used by homes in the US are powered by non-renewable sources so believe me, they have a lot to go to improve and the government is not helping right now. too much latitude given to states despite the fact their pollution can cover 10 other states.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/02/science/earth/02rggi.html?partner=rss

to be honest with ya, this discussion is heading the way of how to get healthy

you say "eat right" , i say "exercise" but lets face it, BOTH need to happen. we are on the same side, but the issue we have here is capabilities...

your suggestion is great but we need MASSIVE change... not change on a scale that 5 or even 10% of homeowners can do. that is too little, too slow, too late.

 

as long as there is money to be made on oil, the move to green energy will be next to impossible without the help of the government because they are the only entity that is even close to big enough to fight the oil companies. the private sector has had enough time to effect change, and to be honest with ya, considering what they have to go against, they have done very very well.

but it aint good enough, fast enough, nothing enough.

http://www.desmogblog.com/oil-companies-sabotaging-america’s-“green”-revolution

ya thats right...Exxon made a 33% return last quarter. over 5 Million dollars AN HOUR in profits...not since the hey days of Intel and Microsoft has any company seen a margin like that.

 

150,000 jobs, huh?
.
How many capable workers do we have biding their time overseas, on
the taxpayer dime??
.
Bring 'em home, and get 'em on the rooftops and hilltops to build
what really needs to be built.
.
_H*

 

$30K doesn't come close to making financial sense for the average homeowner, not even ballpark. What I see quoted as typical annual electrical usage is 10,000 kwh/year--about $1,000/yr depending on where you live. (I suspect this number is low for actual single family houses and includes condos and apartments.) Paying 6% a year on that 30K investment will run you $1,800/yr. You might be able to swing some cheaper financing right now, but long term 6% would probably be very good. Unless your electric rates are shooting upward rapidly the payback is unlikely to be there until the owner's cost of the PV system falls into the sub-$15K range.

If the average person doesn't get their money back in 10-15 years then you can't sell this on the economics. It just doesn't work. There are many much less expensive things that will payback much more rapidly for the average homeowner: high efficiency washers (6-10 years), energy star refrigerators (10-20 years), CFL's (perhaps 1 year, maybe 5 years if fixtures must be changed), solar water heaters (5-10 years depending on climate), electrically (ECM drive) and gas efficient furnaces (95%), higher efficiency AC, geothermal heat pumps, insulation, window replacement, etc.

How many folks have already done all/most of the above (where applicable)? Very, very few. That leaves a very small pool for which PV solar is the best remaining investment.

Where the potential is in moving in the direction of solar for new construction...somehow making the financing of the extra investment "free" would probably do the trick since it is already on a 15-30 year schedule.

The problem for homeowners compared to a production facility for PV is one of scale.

p.s. It appears to me that PV solar needs to be able to adaptively switch the series/parallel arrangements to compensate for any shaded/low output cells.

 

Shawn; your post perfectly illustrates why we need to take solar out of the "home improvement" area and put it into the "government mandated and funded" area. its no longer a question of an individual choice of being green. here is a pic, i just ran out the door and took this picture. its 2 blocks from my house. dont know why its so blurry, but it says

We exceeded EPA guidelines for buying Clean Renewable Energy


two years ago, i bought an EV. i have shown it in The Lacey Alternative Fuel Fair and Electric Car Rally and will do so this year as well. hopefully i have talked one person into trying it out.

we also have a guy named Joe here in Olympia who used a TON of his personal time to go around to nearly 1000 local businesses asking them to provide plug in stalls for EV's to plug in. he started a website, http://www.pluginolympia.com/ so EV owners would know where they could plug in.

all these things made me proud to be here. be a part of it. but it is simply not enough. there is too much change that has to happen and we have a 2 Trillion a year industry fighting against us. there is no way the private sector can win.

we dont have the time for the private sector to do this. there is no way to underestimate the urgency!!. we dont have a little time!! we have most likely gone past that...probably very far past that and our only hope is to change as quickly as we can. i live in one of the "greenest" areas of the country but change is simply coming waaaay too slow and now the lack of money has caused it to stop

the Wa state government waived sales tax on all high mileage vehicle purchases made in 2009 -2011. but is now thinking of waiving that law because of budget shortfalls.

the government has to step in. its not a question of this being part of a socialist movement. its a question of financial, military and economic survival.

 

Hey Shawn, welcome back, I threw the ball back to you in post #29!! OK, rebut time!!

Sure it does. I happen to plan to live a long time in this home! At the time I planned the system, I didn't even care about the payoff idea. My main concern was it will GREATLY reduce the amount of money I have to pay for power. As time goes by and the rates have jumped, well, as they have here, the idea of the system paying for itself is starting to look like a possibility. Even if it it does not, say because I for some reason I have to move and sell the house. The fact that it has a viable Solar pkg, only increases the selling price of the home. If I sold 18 months ago I would have made a real killing!!! Even now, with reality setting in, what I owe vs. what the selling price will be is going to be very considerable!
I consider the Solar move an investment in my home. Same thing as the indoor pool. Investment. Tankless water heaters, Investment. Solar Pool Heater, Investment, "Green" pool pump, Investment. All this time I have been "Investing" in my home and unwittingly "Going Green" H'mmmm

I have discovered a neighbor 5 doors up the street just dropped in a 6.8kW system for around 28k final cost after yada yada.....anyway, its his plan to pay $0 a year. I checked out his system, its been online for only a week, and all the main meter shows is he has consumed only 32 kWh in 7 days! That's amazing, considering the size of the home. We are not even into the bankable summer 45-50 kWh/Day portion of the year. I would bet he does it. We had a long talk Saturday morning. He has also made the effort to "Green" out all he can, and like myself, is still figuring out how to do so! There are also 4 other homes around my neighborhood who are following my lead, I was #2, to go online in g'dale. Missed #1 by 3 days. Damn!!

Like in prior posts, YOU BET. I agree with that thought. Go one step etter, make it manditory!

Of course, we can't forget the wisdom of Icarius. Cut back usage. I think we ALL agree on that one!

Yes, Yes, and Yes. I saw a Science Channel progam about the future of Solar Home Powner. It is going to get very interesting in the coming years. more efficiency, better Inverters, less cost per kW. I just started early, but it is catching on!!!

 

Since my name was mentioned,, I'll chime in with my 2 kwhs worth.

There are some places in North America that are indeed not very well suited (economically mostly), Western WA, Western OR, Coastal CA, Coastal BC for example,, there are many more than can produce WAY more than the average house/mall/factory could use in an average day. (AZ, NM parts of CA,, TX, CO etc.

The obstacle for most people is the up front cost. (Not to mention the aforementioned conservation that I won't reiterate!) It is hard to come up with the upfront cost.

We can argue from now until sunset about the relative merits of PV solar, but I think all in this thread agree that it is a viable technology.
As a matter of social policy we should (IMHO) encourage our leaders to spend some of the money that we are throwing around, coming up with a strategy that allows people to BUY systems with lower up front costs. Tax credits, utility rebates etc are great for bringing down the gross cost,, but the idea of a low or no interest loan to pay the upfront cost could be self sustaining,,, especially if it is big enough.

If Joe homeowner can see that if he borrows say 20k to put in a good sized system, (AFTER DOING THE CONSERVATION!!!!! I CAN'T SAY THIS OFTEN ENOUGH!) and the payments are slightly smaller than the net savings on his electric bill,, it becomes a no brainer. The benefits to the society are huge, while the cost is pretty minimal. Say for example you put 1 billion in in year one on a 10 year amortization schedule, then each year 100 million comes back,,, plus interest. The net cost to the Feds would be almost zero as the interest cost would fund most of the overhead. Make that 10 billion and maybe you have enough demand to bring the price down,,, although that is a bit questionable, because as we are seeing with PV panel prices now,, the price is cheaper than it has ever been,,NOT because they have gotten so much capacity on line driving down the price, but more because world wide demand has collapsed. I have been able to buy new, 25 year warranted panels for under $3/watt buy the each. Cheaper than that in quantity.

Couple that with good, well thought out time of day/demand metering and we all can make a huge start in solving the electrical grid portion of the energy issue AND the carbon dioxide issue. Add in my pet project,, plug in hybrids that can not only buy from the grid,, but they could also sell to the grid at times of peak demand,,, creating a giant battery backup for solar, thereby reducing the idling, spinning capacity of conventional generating facility, and we will have taken a much large step forward.

We all should stop arguing amongst ourselves over nuance, and encourage out elected reps to get off their asses and do something!

Icarus

 

You get NO argument from me on that brother!!!

Besides, I was enjoying the back and forth discussion!

 

WELL!! i think we all agree!

sustainable, ultraclean, available (granted in varying degrees) everywhere. so figure out the fastest way to get it to everyone (here in Wa State, we get the same amount of solar radiation as Germany, the World's leader in solar energy production. Also, in Olympia amidst a tree-lined street, Joe, the Plug in promoter charges his two EV's with solar. all this is in the northern-most state capital south of Juneau)

now, with a few hundred Billion to start, we can get this program going and get it going fast. payback is a no-brainer and with government backing whether it be 10 years in Phoenix, Arizona or 40 years in Portland, Oregon, it wont matter because no matter how long it takes it will pay back much more than the initial INVESTMENT and this would be an investment...not a bailout.

 

The reality is that we have lived off the backs of cheap energy for too long. One simple change that would stimulate the RE biz like nothing else, would be to start charging the real and true cost of our energy choices.

War in the middle east,,, add it tot he pump and real quick people would figure it out. Acid Rain,, CO2 from your coal fired plant killing the planet,, charge the cost of carbon sequestration at the meter,,,, say $.75 kwh for the CO2 alone,, and all of a sudden PV solar looks pretty good. Figuring out how to clean up and store Nuke waste from all those plants,,, how about adding $2.00kwh to the meter.

My whole point is that nobody wants to pay taxes, nobody wants to pay more for energy, but PV solar not only becomes competitive, it wins,, even without tax breaks or subsidy from the utility. We can choose to pay it now,,or pay it later. If we pay it later,, it will certainly will be more expensive.

Icarus

 

OK, this calls for a round, I'm buying!!! Everyone run to your kitchen, grab a beer, or Martguerita, and belly up to da bar boys!!!

 

That makes no sense. You are saying it is economically justified, but also saying the economics are not justifiable.

It either pays back or it doesn't. Making $1,000 a year off of $30,000 investment as I outlined is a money losing proposition. Assuming the system lasts 30 years, maintenance free, that would be 0% return. On the other hand, if I can make $1,000 year off of $15,000 invested, that is the same as making 5% per year off of the money. That would put it on a par with a CD during better times.

I'll tell you what: you loan me $30,000 and I'll sign a note to pay you $1,000 per year for the next 30 years. I'll just put that cash against my home note and cut 9 years of principal off of it. Plus, with that much paid down there is no concern about LTV ratio, so I would be able to lock in a really sweet 15 year refinance cutting another 1.5% a year for me on the balance of the loan as well...saving me more again each year than what I'll be paying you back. In all I would make about 7.5% per year while paying out only 3.33%/year...and I would still have the $30,000 at the end of 30 years too. :wof:

Banking on the irrational nature of the market is not a wise choice. It's called the "Greater Fool Theory." Judging by California real estate prices (and Florida, Nevada, Arizona, and other formerly hot real estate markets) there have been a lot of fools betting on ridiculous price appreciation. Of course, that's a large factor in why many lenders have gone tits up or would have if we hadn't pumped a trillion into them, the lenders were the chief fools.

If folks are really willing to pay an extra $30k for the PV system, great. But most cost saving items will be discounted and at some point they will also begin taking a depreciation hit. Assuming someone will pay $30K more to save $1K/year is not reasonable. At $2k/year it becomes marginally attractive...but folks don't have that sort of money lying about, hence the recession. Ask Lowes, Home Depot (which is closing all its EXPO home design centers that catered to remodeling), or any tradesman how much money is sloshing around right now.

If they are investments, then what is the expected return? There is a big difference between buying things for one's own use and enjoyment, and actually making money off of them on resale some/many years later. The latter is an investment.

You are mixing emotion with investment and failing to distinguish between the two. If you do something to save money or increase resale then you should have some idea of what the value is.

We all do things to our homes to increase our enjoyment of them, but that is not necessarily investment or economically justified.

Home PV install cost still isn't near the sweet spot...unless one is paying 20 cents/kwh for electricity--about twice my current rate.

 

This of course is the real issue. There was an excellent article this week in the NYT by Thomas Friedman about the mispricing of fossil fuels. http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/01/opinion/01friedman.html?_r=1 We need to determine what the cost of sustainable carbon sequestration is per unit of fuel, and tax it at that rate. I don't pretend to know what that value is, but am willing to bet it alone will far exceed the current price of coal or natural gas or oil.

He compares this to the mispricing of CDS swaps and such. The market is far from perfect in pricing things. If not held to account it will ignore the sustainability aspect and blow bubbles. (There was a good article about this aspect in Salon of all things--it was about the Icelandic bank collapse and explained how things such as fishery management prevented certain markets from self immolating into a lose-lose situation. Left unregulated, fisherman will exhaust a fishery and end up with a less efficient solution than if regulated.)

The real difficulty is that any such pricing must be done globally so as not to put one at a disadvantage.

Probably the best answer would be to phase in a carbon dioxide tax over time. This would prevent price shock and allow an orderly transition with obvious price drivers/incentives. It would make long term investment easier to justify and reduce price whipsaws.

 

Yo, Hobbit... where ya been? It is hard to find a system that can NOT handle this gracefully today. We haven't installed a system that is "all or nothing" for the past five years. Partial shade is annoying, and removes a bit more power than the percentage being shaded, but it sure doesn't eliminate ALL power. Not by a long shot. We have tons of partially-shaded situations that work just great. In fact one of them is on my house. And next week we start an installation that is East and West. The front panels will only get light when the back panels are dark.

I'm sure my grammar and spelling suck as usual, but my hope is that my point gets through anyway.

 

Not everything has to "pay off" We bought a Prius not because it would "pay off" or be cheaper to run than a Camry or something else. We bought it because it fit our needs, and by getting one we helped push the envelope of acceptance of the technology. By having Joe and Jane Doe drive a Prius, helps the next door neighbours accept the concept.

I have always said that PV solar is Sexy, and because it is, conservation is a harder sell than PV solar. Having said that,,every PV array placed on a suburban house, or shopping mall or factory makes it seem normal.

I understand that we have to figure out how to pay for stuff,, but as I suggest,, it is not always a case of how good a financial investment it is. There is the investment in the planet to consider.

Icarus

In the interest of full disclosure,, we live about 1/2 the year off grid with 100% solar, using some propane for the fridge and hot water.

We live the other half in a 1890's farm house that is very energy efficient for it's age. Passive solar heat, supplimented with wood and propane, with ~75% solar water heat on a year round basis.
We have not invested in PV solar in this house,, because,, as has been suggested,,,it would be a longer "pay off" period than the hardware life expectancy.

T