ar experiment, pay a little less.
edical research suggests.
ps. one issue is there has been a LOT of basic research on PV solar already and it is not likely to get much better...it could get cheaper, but not be tter. Direct sunlight deposits about 1000 Watts per sq yard and there are fundamental limits as to how much of that you can capture with PV.
There was some clown that told the Wright brothers that if man were meant to fly they'd have been born with wings.
No way you could ever get an airplane to go 550 mph and carry 600 people.
Well, solar does a bit more than that, actually. The solar job I was involved in is providing enough power on a good sunlight day to run his house without much (any?) need for the grid.
To the point where he gets a small check from the power company, instead of a large bill. Since it has no battery storage for surplus generated power, the house has to run off the grid supplied power during the night. As his appliances are gas, it's actually capable of providing sufficient power for his entire house, on it's own. Excess generated power is placed back on the grid and 'sold' back to the power company. In the form of no power bill, but a very small check instead. heh.
During the day, it's providing enough power to make up for the difference cost wise, though. It will be a long time due to the size of the checks before he breaks even, if you look at that way. And a shorter period of time if you look at the electric bills he's no longer getting.
I realize many people don't have the funds to fork out for the equipment or the installation costs, and, not everyone is in a suitable area to be able to make good use of it, even if they could afford it. But, for those who are able, it doesn't make sense not to take advantage of it. The panel technologies will continue to improve, the inverter gear will also continue to improve as a result. Which translates into a viable, realistic source of electrical power, originating from the sun.
Solar is great when there are no cheaper alternatives.
Just down the street, there's a solar powered traffic radar speed sign. The cost of the solar panel is high, but it's way cheaper than digging up the street to run a line to the power grid across the street. It's cheaper than adding an agenda item to the city engineer's todo list. It's a no-brainer.
The power requirement is low. There are no CHEAPER alternative power sources available. Even tho the grid is 100 feet away, accessing it is still more expensive than solar. Great solar application.
50 years ago, that sign would have been a rack full of vacuum tubes and required many times the power of current systems. We got here not by making a bigger solar panel. We got here by REDUCING power consumption by orders of magnitude.The same thing is happening in rooftop solar. Thru artificial means and regulations, the homeowner is presented with a scenario that makes him think that installing solar, for him, is cheaper than not installing solar. To him, the cost is lower. To society, the installed cost of solar powering his home is HIGHER than not doing it.
How can this be? Adding up losses does not equal a gain. You fix that by scaring people into believing that we're all doomed if we don't and we hide/ignore the math. We riot in the streets. We have sit-ins at a pipeline project. We want to save the planet as long as it's done by other people's sacrifice.
Al Gore cures CO2 emissions by flying his private jet between his mansions. Protesters drive their SUV 200 miles back home from the rally and turn up the heat, and turn on the big-screen TV and pop some K-cups in the Keurig. It's easy to tell others how bad they are for the environment.
Let's apply some 'put your money where your mouth is' to the voting process. Your vote on climate-related issues gets weighted inversely to your past sacrifice in reducing your personal carbon footprint. You don't get to vote if you've participated in any demonstration that required police presence. Sacrifice personally to peacefully achieve the goal you seek.
What we're doing thru regulation and sanctions is to try to make existing power sources so expensive that solar looks like a better option. The homeowner doesn't see the total cost on his power bill. He doesn't see that his big screen TV cost more because the trucking company had to pay higher regulatory fees. He doesn't know that his company is moving overseas and he will lose his job next year.
He does wonder why the government can't balance the budget, but he has nothing specific to protest about unless he admits that he's evil and killing the planet.
Legislating fossil fuel consumption would be great if there were a viable alternative. Well, there is...nuclear...but that's the topic of a different rant.
Forcing the 'system' to use more solar power does nothing to make the sun shine when it's night or cloudy or winter. All the expensive technology in the world won't make the sun shine any brighter on a cloudy day.
Solar just doesn't work by itself. It requires SIGNIFICANT EXPENSIVE storage and backup for the 50-100% of the time you can't see the sun, depending on your location.
Ask the man on the street, "would you care if the power went out every night?" "Would you care if your air conditioner didn't work during the hottest part of the day?" "Would you care if you had to choose between a hot bath at noon on sunny days or a cold bath at a time and weather of your choosing?" If you answered no to all of those, you're a candidate for solar power with current technology. Disconnect yourself from the grid. Leaves more power for me.
Do you believe in catastrophic climate change based on human dependence on fossil fuel? I'm not so sure. I think humans will find ways to let their selfishness destroy themselves and the planet whether we have rooftop solar or not. We're screwed either way.
If you believe the gloom and doom, it's a problem that can't be fixed after the tipping point. And that tipping point happens before the problem inconveniences us to the point of action. Our only hope is a dramatic reduction in population. Turns out that nuclear is a solution to that too.
Individuals will always choose instant personal gratification. Those same individuals aggregate in the streets to demand others sacrifice for the greater good. We're screwed, no matter what we do about rooftop solar. The same investment in population reduction would be much better for the environment.
Except that you contradict that in the next paragraph. He most definitely needs the grid to make up the shortfall. The grid has to maintain sufficient capacity to supply the total needs of the population under worst case insolation. The electricity purchased from him by the utility is at a legally mandated rate that exceeds their cost to buy the same power from the grid. The rest of us pay for that in our utility bill.
As rooftop solar increases, the problem gets much worse. On a sunny summer day, the power generation plant has idle equipment. They still pay for that equipment. They still pay salaries. They still have to fix the wires when weather takes them down. But they don't get the profit from selling power. At some point, their daytime peak energy buyback exceeds the remaining demand. What does the utility do with that surplus energy? Without local storage close to the point of generation, rooftop solar is a nonstarter. With local storage at the point of generation, users quickly find that they have huge costs and nobody to buy their peak power at high rates...another nonstarter.
There are certainly great applications for solar power. High population density areas with access to the grid ain't one of them. Come up with CHEAP local storage and we'll talk more...
Nobody (on the grid) with a calculator would ever install rooftop solar unless someone else paid for it.
But, for those who are able, it doesn't make sense not to
If you don't allow fossil fuel, you've run out of rivers to dam, you don't live on a prime thermal energy site, you continue to procreate like rabbits, and you want to continue your current lifestyle, nuclear is the only current technology that makes sense to your calculator.
Solar makes sense in some cases. It is not a general solution to the energy crisis or climate change...at the projected rates of energy consumption.
He has no battery bank, so, during the nighttime, and on very cloudy days, he'd require the grid to make up the difference. If he elects to install a large enough battery bank, he wouldn't require the grid during the evenings or when it's cloudy outside.
I'm unclear as to why you think I contradicted myself. Whatever power the house consumes when the solar system isn't able to provide power isn't costing him money in the form of a bill from the power company, as when sunlight returns, the system makes up for whatever 'losses' it sustained during it's down time.
And, it could avoid that, with a battery bank. He didn't opt for it at the time we did the installation. He still has the option, if he chooses to take it. The wiring for the bank was already done. Place for the bank to live already setup, just waiting. The inverter is bank ready...So.. it's upto him when/if he wants to do it. For home owner safety, terminations to the inverter haven't been completed, but, the wiring is present and ready.
He's not going to become a millionaire with those checks at this rate. The system won't even pay for itself, for years, at this rate, either.. so...
How so?
Power companies sell power to one another when additional power is needed, what's the difference? I doubt they're selling to each other at a loss...
I don't think that's happening here just yet. Likely some years off, if ever.
Sell it to another utility company in need of it? They already do that.
That depends on what qualifies as a nonstarter for you. I don't personally see the issue here. He's invested a pile of cash into a solar power source, and, it's doing it's job. It's saving him money in the form of no electric bills. But, he's still at a financial loss because the savings won't pay for the equipment for several years down the road. And, if going by the check amounts, it'll take even more years to pay it off.
He doesn't have to sell any of it back to the power company, if he doesn't want to. All he has to do is flip a switch outside the home and the excess generated power will not be returned to the grid. At this point, it would simply be wasted, since he has no battery bank to store it.
He's not in a high population density area, though. And, the grid isn't the most stable where he resides. So, Solar made sense for him.
Sorry, but, you're wrong. He paid for the gear and installation, out of his own pocket. He paid for the entire house, custom built to his specifications. No bank financing, no home loan, none of that.
Along with the RV inside the RV garage he wanted. Which is attached to the house. He didn't take any handouts in the form of government assistance of any kind for any aspect of it.
And, I seriously doubt he's the only person able to do something like that either.
The RV garage made the service entrance work a real pisser for myself though. Fuck. My arms hurt just thinking about it. That was a nightmare. Enter 90degree angle, go straight up (the RV wasn't exactly a short one, it was rather tall!), 90degree angle, come straight across (easily 15ft or more), another 90degree angle, come straight down to the electrical panels, inverter, etc. I absolutely hated it and hope to never have to pull service entrance wire for something like that again. I'm not a big/husky fellow you understand, so, it wasn't a walk in the park for my happy ass.
To quote a friend, "what does any of that have to do with the price of tea in China?"
I didn't say otherwise...
That is in the works from what I've read. Like everyth1ng else, you have to jump in and start and then you have evolution. Your other points are valid, but solar is still an infant. It should not be a give away, but some subsidy in the right place can be good.
Ha, thats the best part.
Does he know that most grid tie inverters will NOT function without the grid.
What that means in practical terms, he cannot use the electricity from solar during a power failure.
I think that is a travesty and the rules re inverter designs should be changed.
Right now this behavior is REQUIRED by the rules to prevent the possibility of backfeeding power to a dead power line.
m
Bingo, that about sums it up. Plus the rest of us also pay for it with federal tax credits.
Which is why in some states, utilities are starting to levy a fee on solar systems to help pay for the infrastructure that's there, which they need, but use very little of. In other words, the current, widely used pricing schemes, still assume customers are relying totally on the electric company for power. If instead, a large number convert to solar and only pull 10% of their needs from the utility, the pricing models for power delivery fall apart, with not enough revenue to cover the cost of the plants and the massive distribution system.
Correct. The exception being hippies with extra bucks, Hollywood loons, etc.
It certainly seems the best option if you believe that CO2 is going to doom us all in the not too distant future. Funny thing though, the same hippies, environmentalist and media dimwits that claim CO2 is going to kill us all, are also dead set against nuclear. Now nuclear is far from perfect and has it's own serious risks, but if you believe Co2 is dooming the planet, then clearly we should be building them as fast as we can. Yet the above folks just pretend that electricity for cars or whatever comes out of the wall and ignore all the excellent points you and I know are true.
It's certainly not with today's technology, that's for sure. And we haven't gotten to the possible serious problems, like what if panels don't last the 30 years it takes to get your money back?
Typically that check is because the govt is forcing the utility to buy the power at rates far above what they could obtain the electricity for from other, conventional sources.
And absent federal tax credits, forcing utilities to buy the power at inflated rates, it will never break even.
And a
Sure, for the individual, if you ignore the true, actual costs to all of us.
The panel technologies will continue to
It's nowhere near viable yet, the massive govt subsidies and forcing of utilities proves it. And bear in mind, that the govt is pouring billions into this now, with only a very small percentage of deployment. The govt is already broke and doesn't have enough money to subsidize it to become a major portion of our electricity source.
What's the size and cost of that battery bank? Add that to the total cost and make it the real cost too, not the cost after massive govt tax credits. Clearly the battery model isn't here, solar is being installed here and not a one that I've heard of uses batteries. They are all grid tied, grid dependent.
True. But his neighbor, who doesn't have solar, is getting screwed because the utility, in most cases, is being forced to buy his solar energy at inflated prices, when they could be buying cheaper, grid electric from conventional sources. And we're all helping pay for his electric because of big tax subsidies.
Utilities being mandated to buy his solar power at inflated costs.
His house, with minimal needs from the grid, not fairly paying for all the infrastructure necessary to deliver him that power.
Massive tax breaks that increase the tax burden for all tax payers, which isn't in your utility bill, but we still pay it.
The difference is that utilities are being forced to buy solar at inflated rates. May not be true everywhere, but it's the case in many places, including here in NJ.
They can't sell it when all the utilites have the same problem. Right now, there is excess capacity at night. Who can you sell that too?
The problem is the rest of us are paying for it, that it's totally economically unviable on it's own.
He doesn't have to sell any of it back to the power company, if he
IDK how you do that. I;d like to see an example of a typical ome solar system that is not required to be connected to the grid. Everyone I've seen, if the grid goes down, you have no power, it disconnects and shuts down. Which is one of the ironic things, all the people here with solar, if there is a power outage, they will be without power just like the rest of us.
At
Show us the spec sheet for the eqpt he's using that doesn't require the grid for him to have power.
No he didn't, unless he's a complete fool or pays no income tax. Every solar installer touts the big tax credits that make it work. And I'll bet the utility is paying him more for his solar than they can generate or but electricity for. Many states also have other rebate programs that kick in money too.
Bingo! I just asked Diesel to provide us with the spec sheet for the inverter he claims to have installed that he says will work without the grid. Every installer pitch I've heard, every story about actual installation, they all tell you that if the grid goes down, you have no power. Unless you have a battery bank, which no one here is hawking, that's for sure, because it just makes the economics worse and you can ride your free connection to the grid.
The fundamental problem here is that without the grid or a battery bank, there is no ability to provide consistent power. It suddenly gets cloudy, then what? Brown out?
I don't think that's the real problem. The same potential for backfeeding exists with any alternate power system, eg generators and it's routinely handled with an interlock, etc.
I often wonder that if you had suitable transfer equipment, could you kick start a grid tie inverter with a regular 12v input inverter on the line side. I think they are really just looking for clocking from the grid.
Around here, those signs are portable, and moved to different places. A permanent solution like digging up the street would not be appropriate.
He has options, that's just one place for him to get them, if he wanted. So I can't set a price in stone for you. But, you can do the math if you'd like.
He's not taking advantage of tax credits. It's paperwork he wasn't interested in doing.
You seem to be a bit behind the times, then. There's all kinds of inverters available now, too. Few of them are grid dependent anymore. And those should be well on their way out, as in, becoming extinct in favor of the ones which support battery banks, and, at your option (if you're willing to spend the money), completely grid independent power source.
Again, you seem to be out of touch...
That's not true, here...
He's taking a loss, and, he'll continue to eat it for years to come because he didn't take advantage of any tax credits, loans, etc. He paid cash for the entire system. he wanted it, he didn't care if it made him money. To put it simply, the guy has more cash than he has economic sense. If he wants something, he doesn't care what it costs, he buys it. He can afford to.
And the state benefits too, because his property taxes went up as a result of the 'improvement' to his brand new home. That he also paid for, outright. No bank loan. No mortgage.
He's paying out the ass for it. The ONLY thing he's getting back is a tiny check each month instead of a bill, And, I do mean a tiny check. some of them aren't even worth taking the time for him to deposit.
He's NOT taking advantage of ANY. So, no, you're not paying for it. None of you are.
It's NOT true here.
How is it my problem or fault that they have no means of storing excess power for a rainy day?
The rest of you are not paying a damn dime for his setup. He didn't opt for any credits, loans, subsidies, nothing.
You've seen older and otherwise limited solar systems, then.
You like? :)
Yes, he did. I'd opt for the fool, given the choices you presented. :) But, I can't really say he's a fool because he's got a shitload of money from his career in the medical field...I suppose one can be highly intelligent AND a fool at the same time, though.
He didn't use a solar installer. He asked his contractor about it, and they went over some options with him, he chose one, the contractor had us (the electricians) install it.
That would be a bad bet to place...We're in TN...
The system has an automatic disconnect switch (interlock) from the grid; just like a house generator does. So, that it does NOT under any circumstances backfeed a dead grid and electrocute someone who's working on it. The ONLY time it will provide power to the grid is if the grid is hot, AND, the owner hasn't manually flipped another switch that isolates his house from the grid; which forces the house to run entirely on solar power.
He's using a hybrid inverter...So it doesn't need the grid to run. It's able to provide power without the grid, via the panels on his house, AND a battery bank if he opts to get one.
If you pull up the spec sheet, it's the one to the right:
Here's another one (so I'm not being totally biased here) that can provide power, without the grid:
Also, an optional Secure Power Supply (SPS) feature enables these Sunny Boy inverters to supply up to 12 A at 120VAC to a single outlet for recharging portable devices or a small UPS directly from the PV array in the event of a grid outage.
You guys both seem to be a bit more than behind the times on this...
It's not a problem. It has an interlock which prevents it from backfeeding onto a dead grid, just like a house generator does, by code. As well as having a secondary interlock that he can flip to isolate his house from the grid, whether it's hot or not.
The closest one to me is in a school zone. Permanently affixed to a pole, across the street from the power distribution system.
I don't have any idea how cities deal with paying for power for street lights and traffic signals. I see very few with meters on 'em.
being connected to the grid or a battery bank. Like I say, I haven't
Pulled it up and here is what they say:
Click on Residential Grid-Tied Solar with Backup power:
Solutions
During grid outages PV Inverter production cannot occur, so a home with a P V inverter system installed will not have power during an outage. However f or homes that have a PV Inverter system installed and are already selling p ower to the grid, it is still possible to retrofit backup power using Conex t XW+ or SW inverter chargers. In a FIT program either Conext XW+ or SW is added behind PV inverter to provide backup, no change to PV inverter FIT wi ring is required. However backup power is limited to the capacity of the ba ttery bank and the solar system cannot be used to charge the batteries whil e the grid is down. I
Click on Residential Backup Power:
Solutions
Conext XW+ or Conext SW integrates into the residential electrical system a nd seamlessly converts power from battery reserves to power critical loads such as pumps, security systems, refrigerators and electronics, when utilit y grid power is unavailable.
Click on Residential Self-Consumption:
Solutions
Enabled by PriorityPower both Conext XW+ and Conext SW will prioritize the self-consumption of stored battery and PV generated power over grid power, helping homeowners avoid high utility charges. Both XW+ and SW also provide for backup in areas prone to grid outages. Conext XW+ takes it one step fu rther by enabling excess PV power to be sold using GridSell Coupling the P V system to the battery bank with Conext MPPT Solar Charge Controllers is the most efficient and economical method for self-consumption
Every scenario that they show using their product, if power is available without the grid being powered up, it includes BATTERIES.
Further, I pulled up the install instructions. Page 2-13:
"The Conext XW+ Inverter/Charger operates with batteries as its source of D C power. If DC power sources are connected directly to the inverter, the DC r ating of the inverter can be exceeded and the inverter can be damaged.
Battery Bank Requirements The DC voltage of the Conext XW+ Inverter/Charger must match the nominal voltage of the system and battery-connected devices. The inverter is a 48 V inverter; therefore, the battery bank and battery-connected devices in the system must be configured for 48 volts. Battery Cable Requirements Battery cable length Cable runs should be kept as short as practical. Length should not exceed 1
0 feet (3 m). Run the positive and negative cables alongside each other. Avoi d cable loops. In order to keep the battery cable length short, install the Conext XW+ Inv erter/ Charger as close as possible to the battery room or battery enclosure. Note: The minimum recommended battery bank is 440 Ah per inverter/charger. The Conext XW+ Inverter/Charger is designed to operate with batteries and should not be operated without them. Also, do not allow the battery bank to become completely discharged. If the voltage of the battery bank falls belo w 40 volts, the Conext XW+ Inverter/Charger will not operate.PAges 3-14 thru 3-16 show how it's used, all examples show it connected to a battery bank.
Note what it says, is that it can supply a "single isolated outlet". It does not say that it can be configured to power the whole house.
Which of course is obviously because it cannot, because of the same issues that prevent all the other grid tied systems from providing power during outages. Look, it's really, really simple. If it were possible for the array to be used to provide power to the whole house during outages, every one of these solar companies that are selling their equipment, installing it, would be hawking this a a MAJOR benefit and selling point. Either they are incredibly stupid or it's not simple, cost effective to make this possible without a battery bank or other substantial increase in cost.
Show us some examples of actual installations that do what you claim. There should be plenty of application examples, if it exists and is cost effective for the average homeowner. I'm betting part of the reason it isn't done is the sun doesn't maintain full 100% power to the panel all the time. A cloud passes by, if you have no battery bank, then what? How many people would put up with being cut-off or having the power drop to 60V when a cloud comes by?
Everyone is free to judge who's out of touch with the times. Show us examples of companies installing residential solar power that feature it's ability to work during pour outages without a battery bank. I would hope that you'd agree that if this is available, it would be a MAJOR selling point. If company A had it, on a system that was close in price to company B, that didn't which one would everyone want?
I also looked for "hybrid solar inverter" and everything I found was along these lines:
"How are hybrid inverters used in solar projects?
January 14, 2015 Kathie Zipp : Hybrid inverters are commonly used in the developing world, but they are st arting to make their way into daily use in certain areas of the U.S due to their ability to stabilize energy availability. A solar inverter?s main job is to convert DC power generated from t he array into usable AC power. Hybrid inverters go a step further and work with batteries to store excess power as well. This type of system solves is sues renewable energy variability and unreliable grid structures.
Key word: Batteries
And again, if these could provide power for the masses with solar array without batteries when the grid goes down, you'd sure think they would be bragging about it in the above.
Apparently the industry disagrees that backfeeding is a problem. I don't think it's the only problem, ie clouds would seem to be a bigger and insurmountable problem to me, without a battery bank of course.
Again, no one said you can't buy a battery bank, only that it adds significantly to the cost and has other disadvantages.
Then he's the exceptional case and absent some compelling need for solar, or the inability to use a calculator, nuts.
What percent of the residential installs do you think have battery banks? Show us some write ups about all the ones being installed for the masses that have battery banks. Are a small, insignificant percentage doing it, typically for special reasons, sure. The vast majority of installs going in today, no.
There's all kinds of
But so far, from everything I've seen, from everything you've submitted as evidence, I have yet to see one that will power the house with the grid down, unless it has a battery bank. Which of course is what Mike and I said. You did provide a link to one small unit, which will provide limited power to one isolated outlet, but not the house.
And those should be well on their way out, as in, becoming
Except of course that it's unlikely that many people are going to want a battery bank, the cost and other issues that come with it. Battery options have been available, but people are already shelling out big bucks for the basic solar capability.
Funny how you post something that is exactly in line with what we've been telling you, then claim that somehow it's something else. That link just confirms what Mike and I have been telling you. It doesn't say what price electric companies are paying for the solar, just that they are buying it. It doesn't say that they are buying it because it's cost effective, that they want to buy it. And in most cases, they are buying it because they are Forced by govt to buy it and they are paying inflated rates for it.
Thanks again for proving out points. From your own link above:
A Renewables Portfolio Standard (?RPS?) is a statute or oth er piece of regulation that mandates that a portion of at state?s e lectricity is produced from renewable resources (like solar power) by a cer tain date. If you have been following renewable energy policy at all, you a lready know that a whole lot of states have passed strong a strong RPS. Man y of the RPS?s mandate goals as high as 30%, even 40% renewable pro duction in the next 10-15 years.
So what?s going on in Tennessee? Well, not much. Nothing in fact. T ennessee has absolutely no renewables portfolio, no targets ? nothi ng. Tennessee needs to get on track; Colorado, California, New York, New Je rsey, Connecticut, Rhode Island, Oregon, Washington, Arizona, and many othe r states that have already passed strong RPS?s to ensure a bright f uture for solar power and other renewable energy. Trust us, a strong RPS is integral to having that bright future here. No one wants to give you free money ? least of all the electric companies. Without a strong RPS p ushing them, politicians and CEOs have no incentive to give you incentives. Incentives for more solar power, that is!"
So, right there, they admit that exactly what we said is true. To make solar viable, it needs the govt forcing utilities to buy the power. Of course we all know that the reason for that is that it's EXPENSIVE compared to the other electric sources the utility could buy from. So, while TN isn't doing it, clearly these solar promoters say they need to, to make solar happen. And on top of that, you also have federal subsidies, in the form of tax credits, and that is available in TN.
Bingo. Absent those subsidies, he'll never break even.
If he wants something, he doesn't care what it
Which of course has nothing to do with the big picture, the true cost and viability of solar.
How is he paying for the cost of the grid infrastructure if he's not using and paying for any electricity? His neighbor, with a $150 a month electric bill, he's paying for it.
The ONLY thing he's getting back is
I'd say his neighbors are paying for the cost of the grid infrastructure that he makes use of. But granted, that's a small subsidy. But what one unusual case is doing is irrelevant to the big picture. And in the big picture, do you deny that solar is receiving big subsidies? EG, federal tax credits, state credits in some cases, utilities being forced to buy solar electric at inflated rates?
That doesn't change the fact that it is in most places. Or the fact that your own link says that TN needs to start doing the same. If solar is competitive without state assistance, why does your own link point to the other states and say that TN needs to do it too?
No one said it was your fault. Good grief.
He's the exceptional case. You happened to come across one guy who apparently has no taxable income, so he can't take advantage of the federal credits. And you happen to live in state that isn't subsidizing solar. And a guy who doesn't care that he's losing money on the whole thing. WTF does that have to do with the situation that the vast majority of solar people are in?
Wrong. What everyone said here from the beginning was that without a battery bank, if you lose the grid power, then the solar system for the house goes down and the house isn't powered even if the sun is shining. The install instructions for the above inverter clearly say that it must be installed with a BATTERY BANK.
Taken out of context. YOU claimed that he has power without the grid, without a battery bank, with the sun shining. Sure, if he has batteries then he will have power. I and Mike acknowledged that from the beginning.
That's only because the penetration of rooftop solar is so small. Consider the limiting case where YOU are the only one not using rooftop solar. You'd be paying the entire cost of the grid which is still capable of providing peak needs at night and on cloudy days for all those other people selling their peak power back to the utility.
My electrical bill was $30 for electricity and another $26 for fixed costs. Would be interesting to know how that ratio would change if everybody but me had rooftop solar without storage.
Rooftop solar without local storage is UNSUSTAINABLE. Local storage is impractical with current technology for anybody with grid access.
How much carbon is released while manufacturing/installing/maintaining a rooftop solar system? What does all that additional installation do to your property taxes, or roof maintenance costs, or home insurance costs? People just ignore the fact that local storage has its own demons when it comes to production and recycling.
You can make a case for solar and wind farms, but as a total supply of energy, it's impractical without a breakthrough in storage. Even with subsidies, the masses cannot afford rooftop solar. Rooftop solar will never be a huge percentage of supply in places where a grid exists.
Nuclear is the only technology on the horizon capable of meeting our energy needs with low carbon footprint. We spend money on giving away rooftop solar systems. Perhaps that would be better spent on making nuclear safer. Invest in a path that could actually provide a solution.
Tree huggers need to "take a timeout." Yes, nuclear is gonna kill some people. But, so do automobiles. It's the cost of progress. In perspective, maybe we should outlaw automobiles.
But what
HomeOwnersHub 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.