That 'problem' may not be a problem so much as the impetus for new solutions, such as reducing those fixed costs, or improving the 'sustainable' sources' availability (better storage, etc.). The more energy costs, the harder people will work finding alternates.
Nearly everyone would love running off sunshine if we could. It's just unreliable, early days, and few people (or peoples) can afford playing with it. Most people in this world are too busy trying to eat to be bothered with solar panels.
It's been a problem locally. Here's one (admittedly old) horror story: I don't know enough about the power grid to determine if the claims are true or bogus.
It's quite real on the left coast. PG&E is investing in multiple technologies to see which ones make the most sense: Flywheels, battery banks, compressed air or gas in underground chambers, pumping water uphill, etc. The whole idea is to reduce the need to generate more power during consumption peaks.
I didn't want to expand the discussion. Net metering is more a political problem than anything technical.
The current compromise seems to be that the power companies will pay producers no more than the rate that they would pay for importing power from outside the area. For example, in your area: New England is paying $70/Megawatt-hr or $0.070/kw-hr LMP (location marginal pricing): Last night, it was about $0.025/kw-hr. I don't know what your local utility pays for your production, but on the left coast, it's about $0.02/kw-hr. Incidentally, residential power users pay about $0.15/kw-hr.
--
Jeff Liebermann jeffl@cruzio.com
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558
--
Jeff Liebermann jeffl@cruzio.com
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558
I agree, Subsidizing solar power in the NE makes no sense to me. Electric heat pumps and geothermal is good, subsidize that. Better windows and insulation, would help in older homes.
Call me stupid, but I pay an extra ~$200 a year to get all my electric from the local wind farm*. I guess that's my small "feel good" penance. (We burn in excess of 1,000 gal. of oil/gas, heating the house and driving cars.)
Win, Someone's paying the $34k, how does that make sense?
George H.
*(There's no wind farm in my county or I might be getting a similar size tax break.)
There are hundreds of windmills on the ridge east of me. With enough windmills spread across the US I could see some system that could monitor wind speed and expected power, seems like you need a storage system too. In my area the windmills are on the ridges so pumped water maybe. (We have lots of water too, some of the pumped water storage could also capture local hydro.) Pumped storage makes no sense in Texas, (where I think they have a lot of windmills.)
On farms we should have methane cookers for the waste. (that's kinda a double win, if you live near a farm.)
Different strokes for different folks I don't see a nation wide "green" energy source unless its.... nuclear fission! (the "greenest" energy?)
How do you address roof maintenance? Granted, your asphalt shingle roof will typically last longer (without significant maintenance) than any of the roofing technologies, here...
But, eventually, you'll have to put a "second" roof on (or tear the two that you have off and put on "fresh").
I assume removing the panels and later replacing them will be a comparable job to a clean installation (?) as any brackets will have to come up in order to remove the shingles they've been laid upon. And, presumably some care to ensure any holes through the roof sheathing for the mounts don't become leaks later...
Likewise, how does it fare wrt trapping snow? You've got a respectable pitch but I assume snow will still collect uphill from the panels (?) Any worry of ice dams forming and water backing up under the shingles above?
Lastly, were your incentives conditional on using the grid for storage? How would eliding that option affect your ROI? (would you have scaled back the size of the installation?)
"The highest concentration of wind turbines in the United States is in the Great Plains states, where the best conditions for onshore wind power generation exist."
"The U.S., as of 2016, has nearly 75 GW of installed wind power capacity."
The problem is NIMBY (not in my back yard). Typical documentary on the problem (mostly about Canada): (42:10) Incidentally, at 17:50 is a discussion on whether the Ontario Canada power grid can handle the power produced by the wind farmers and about adding power plants to deal with there's no wind.
In many parts of the country, installing a big wind turbine in your back yard is considered a profitable investment. Never mind that they're big, ugly, noisy, kill birds, cause insomnia, irritate the neighbors, decrease residential property values, etc. If you're going to invest in a wind farm, I suggest you find one in an unpopulated area or setup some kind of profit sharing system to bribe the neighbors into being more tolerant.
--
Jeff Liebermann jeffl@cruzio.com
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558
I'm told the bracket studs stay in place. But if not, that part of the install goes quickly. With everything already cut to size removal and reinstall may not be so bad. But one interesting thing, the panels shield the roof from sun and the elements, so that portion will last longer. Also, I imaging someplace around the 20-to-25 year point we'll want to upgrade the solar equipment. That may match our tile lifetime.
It does fine. If there's not too much, the snow on top slides off fairly quickly, and I didn't observe any upside collection. The 3-4-inch clearance under the panels is free from snow.
No. In fact the solar production meter, used for SREC calculation, is tied to the panel output; we get credit even if we use 100% of the electricity. I think 16 states have SREC or TREC programs. If we only had the 30% IRS tax credit, the payback time would be about 10 years. Furthermore, if the net metering program were to be changed, and our contribution to the grid was priced lower, that'd stretch out the payback time. We could help that scene with a Tesla Powerwall, etc., but that'd add to the system cost and stretch out payback. If this happened after our 5-year breakeven, as I fully expect, that'd not be so bad. Instead of free electricity, we'd have to purchase maybe 25%.
But, they attach to the roof joists *through* the shingles (or, you claim to have tile? I'd have to double-check your photo...); so, how do you remove and replace the shingles (tile tends to have a longer life -- though we have many friends with tile roofs and *buckets* dispersed inside their "country club" homes to collect the rainwater that comes
*through* the roof! :< ).
Here, roofs tend to need frequent servicing (I'm due to go up and brush all the collected pine needles off ours -- lest they trap moisture and "rot" the roofing material). And, replacement every ~10 years (I've babied ours and its now 25+ years old while most of the neighbors have simply replaced theirs -- once or *twice* -- in that timeframe).
And, as many roofs are flat (1:12 or even 1:48 pitch), collectors have to "stand up" off the roof surface -- which makes them vulnerable to the frequent microbursts coming off the mountains to the north (of course, the north side of the solar panels is the elevated end so they act like little wind-sails).
Etc.
As a result, we concluded that the only prudent solar approach would require first replacing/upgrading the roof to something that wouldn't need frequent maintenance/servicing. The costs for that obviously making the ROI even worse (no tax incentives for those costs)
Here, the mounts would serve to catch "organic debris" (leaves, pine needles, palm bark, etc.). I pull a 35G garbage pail of pine needles off the roof every month -- and we have NO pine trees on the property... no deciduous trees, either!
[Of course, snow isn't a concern, here. But, it was a curiosity having lived in NE for many years]
And, be yet another maintenance issue (wonder what one of THOSE looks like when it catches fire? :> )
Here there has been talk of a *surcharge* on solar customers "for the privilege" of having the grid as a fallback. I.e., pay for something you *don't* use! This is par for the course -- conserve water and rates go up because we're not using ENOUGH water (to keep the sewer lines clear, etc. -- there's ALWAYS some argument to justify the increases!)
The way around it is, of course, to go TOTALLY off (electric) grid. Not something I'm keen on doing at my age.
We replaced our roof with a 20-25 year version just before the solar install. They recommend a new or recent roof. BTW, this type of issue is an example of why I wanted to own the system, rather than lease one.
The solar panels catching fire? The install includes system shutoff for firefighters, etc.
Here, asphalt shingles would be *dust* in 20 years. The sun just eats things that remain exposed to it.
Yes, there's a push, here, for you to "lease your roof" to someone who wants to capture the tax credits, etc. Silly idea for the homeowner -- who is then faced with the hassle of trying to maintain a house *under* all that stuff!
No. I was commenting re: your reference to Tesla's "big battery" :>
Well the wind farms here are mostly farmers fields and woods.
formatting link
(I looked for a better pic.) There are some that IME are too close to some houses. And I'm not sure how much they are compensated for it.
Beside paying a fee to the farmers for use of the land the wind farms also contribute to property taxes and that gives everyone in the county a break. (Sheldon county where one of the farms is only has a pop. of 2,500 so it's not all that much money to give everyone a nice tax break.)
Oh, I see your angle. I wrote a check for $34k, but I'll claim $10k from the IRS next year, and the other 1/3 will dribble in from minting SRECs, one per MWh. Eventually taxpayers will pay 30% and other electric- rate payers a similar amount. Electric bill savings over a five-year period will pay back the rest.
A neighbor handled that on a recent install by getting a 50-yr "standing seam" metal roof first. The panels grip the standing seams, so the roof is continuous--no perforations. Looks nice, too.
Did they go with thin film strips between the ridges, or with mono or polycrystaline panels on top of the ridges? Just curious. Some discussion on the relative merits of both system: Also, how noisy is the roof when it rains?
--
Jeff Liebermann jeffl@cruzio.com
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558
We don't have SREC's in California, so I don't know much about them. The scheme seems something that only a commodities speculator could appreciate or understand. The state does its best to establish a speculative market, only to have it set both upper and lower limits on the price and assess penalties on the utilities if they don't meet their SREC purchase quotas: "The SREC price can range anywhere from $4/SREC to $480/SREC, depending on your state, the time the SREC was generated, and SREC market volatility. Like any commodity market, the SREC price is based on supply and demand, so the price can fluctuate."
Looks like the utilities are currently paying $275/SREC in Mass: That's $0.275/kw-hr, which is much better than the $0.04/kw-hr we get for net metering in Calif. If you meet your 12Mw-hr goal this year, that could mean 12 * $275 = $3,300 back from the utility. Very nice.
Let's hope that Mass keeps the CRECs in place. That didn't happen in California, where the equivalent TREC market effectively died starting in about 2013:
--
Jeff Liebermann jeffl@cruzio.com
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558
ElectronDepot website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.