to put up shingles, and that there are $17k worth of incentives that are applicable. So you'd have to believe that the roof is capable of generating the nearly $3k a year in electricity it claims it will, and won't suffer a single failure. And that's assuming that these costs have the installation built in, which is going to be higher than regular shingles regardless.
Not that I don't like the idea of generating my own electricity even if it's going to cost me, but not sure how the math works out to it being anywhere near the same cost, let alone cheaper.
not because it does not work. It is because no matter what the product or incentive is, the math always seems to work out to roughly a 7 year payback/break even.
I have had 5 different companies come in and give me their pitch over the past 12 years. I have seen the math that others were given (friends relatives).
They ask for your utility bill up front and your average monthly cost goes into a spreadsheet/calculation that backs into the cost of the system.
Regarding the roof shingles...$75k for the system is the highest cost that I have ever heard. Although, you are getting a roof at the same time.
If you decide to drive an electric car or hybrid the energy savings Â
at least another decade, probably more. Just not enough research on longevity and effectiveness over time. You are better off getting top of the line insulation with high energy efficiency rating mechanicals for a fraction of the price.
Traditional solar is intriguing but I’m still skeptical there too though not as much as the shingles.
A roof on a modest sized house shouldn’t cost more than Â
$6k-$8k and that’s with higher end GAF 30 yr shingles. New roofs aren’t expensive anymore, it’s one of the cheapest of the “major” upgrades/repairs on a house.
For SolarCity before we merged with Tesla. The reason they ask for your utility bill is to see you annual electric consumption. We can only design a system based on what you use. The electric company won’t allow you to have a larger system. I’ve been in homes where the homeowner wanted a larger system and sell back to the utilities but it’s not allowed. The roof right now is pricey. There are states like NJ that have the SREC’S and that helps offset the price. You get 1 SREC for 1000kWh produced and they can be sold for $230/SREC. So, if your system produces 10000kWh you will get 10 SREC’s. You can make $2300. So, if you buy the roof and it cost say $5000 a year the SREC’s can help offset that, NY is different as they give a $5000 tax credit. NY doesn’t have SREC’s.
There are states like NJ that have the SREC’S and that helps offset the price. You get 1 SREC for 1000kWh produced and they can be sold for $230/SREC. So, if your system produces 10000kWh you will get 10 SREC’s.
Right... and they try to use the SREC income as part of the cost offset. Meanwhile, SRECs prices are directly tied to the market and government legislation. I watched SRECs drop well below $100 each years ago not long after a solar salesman tried to sell me.
The bottom line is this...
1. if the government was truly in favor of going solar, then the cost of the panels would be more regulated than they are today.... and their subsidy would be higher.
2. There is no doubt that the final price of the system that you are given is manipulated to have a certain payback over time.
3. There is no way that we do not have the technology to produce solar panels at a lower cost than what the consumers are being charged today.
I agree with you. If you have the roof and can produce more clean energy why shouldn’t you be able to do that and sell it back to the utilities. The SREC’s price does fluctuate and it is a risk. You can hold on to them for 3 years before you have to sell them.
I see a lot of Solar Panel Roof Arrays in my line of work. I always ask about the cost --
The Install usually costs between $22K and $30K, and many installers don't go inside the attic to beef up the cross-bracing. Those Panels have some weight to them, and basic collar ties may not provide enough support. The Homeowner will finance the cost with the Installer. Over 20 years, they are typically paying $180 - $200 a month. Their Electric bill drops by about.......$200 a month.
On my own house, we put a 16 SEER HVAC Unit in last summer. Total cost after discounts and SCEG Rebate was $4K, paid in full. The Electric Bill in the high summer months dropped by $200 bucks.
So this may be dated, but in NJ and a lot of northern states you actually have to be on grid. So you aren’t getting your own energy rather you are selling back to grid. Which means power outages and what not you are still SOL.
The pricing I included from Tesla above includes a Powerwall Â
so you have battery storage in the event of a grid outage. That's the good.
The bad is that even with maximum power output you're still paying more for the system than you would have for the requisite electricity over the lifespan of the unit.
I have a unique scenario in that it's a seasonal home, used only 3 months out of the year. In theory it should be able to generate electricity in excess of what I'm using, effectively pushing more of the energy sold back into payments for the installation. I just don't think they're up front in terms of the actual cost - from the occasional repairs over the life of the device, to the actual lifespan, to structural improvements that need to be made to support the installation down to the actual amount of energy generated.
I'd much rather they were up front and said 'look, this is good for the environment but it's going to cost you more' than try to pass it off as a cost savings. When you have tricky financial documents that discuss tax rebates and financing over the course of 30 years, there's really no clear cost savings being achieved.
I agree with you. If you have the roof and can produce more clean energy why shouldn’t you be able to do that and sell it back to the utilities. The SREC’s price does fluctuate and it is a risk. You can hold on to them for 3 years before you have to sell them.
You do sell the overage back to the utilities but at a fraction of what you pay to purchase the same kilowatt from the utility company.
Once again, this is another example of how the government has never truly taken this seriously. The cost at which the utility company would buy the overage should mirror the cost to produce that energy via coal, etc.
Responding to the other individual now about being tied to the grid and being SOL with a power outage. Not all systems are like that. You would have a bank of batteries with a storage supply in your home. The more batteries you have, the better off you are.... so you do not have to purchase as much excess energy from the utility company at times when you have little sun.
Not that I don't like the idea of generating my own electricity even if it's going to cost me, but not sure how the math works out to it being anywhere near the same cost, let alone cheaper.
I suspect like most of these ideas...sounds better then it really is....
I have had 5 different companies come in and give me their pitch over the past 12 years. I have seen the math that others were given (friends relatives).
They ask for your utility bill up front and your average monthly cost goes into a spreadsheet/calculation that backs into the cost of the system.
Regarding the roof shingles...$75k for the system is the highest cost that I have ever heard. Although, you are getting a roof at the same time.
Traditional solar is intriguing but I’m still skeptical there too though not as much as the shingles.
Right... and they try to use the SREC income as part of the cost offset. Meanwhile, SRECs prices are directly tied to the market and government legislation. I watched SRECs drop well below $100 each years ago not long after a solar salesman tried to sell me.
The bottom line is this...
1. if the government was truly in favor of going solar, then the cost of the panels would be more regulated than they are today.... and their subsidy would be higher.
2. There is no doubt that the final price of the system that you are given is manipulated to have a certain payback over time.
3. There is no way that we do not have the technology to produce solar panels at a lower cost than what the consumers are being charged today.
The Install usually costs between $22K and $30K, and many installers don't go inside the attic to beef up the cross-bracing. Those Panels have some weight to them, and basic collar ties may not provide enough support. The Homeowner will finance the cost with the Installer. Over 20 years, they are typically paying $180 - $200 a month. Their Electric bill drops by about.......$200 a month.
On my own house, we put a 16 SEER HVAC Unit in last summer. Total cost after discounts and SCEG Rebate was $4K, paid in full. The Electric Bill in the high summer months dropped by $200 bucks.
The bad is that even with maximum power output you're still paying more for the system than you would have for the requisite electricity over the lifespan of the unit.
I have a unique scenario in that it's a seasonal home, used only 3 months out of the year. In theory it should be able to generate electricity in excess of what I'm using, effectively pushing more of the energy sold back into payments for the installation. I just don't think they're up front in terms of the actual cost - from the occasional repairs over the life of the device, to the actual lifespan, to structural improvements that need to be made to support the installation down to the actual amount of energy generated.
I'd much rather they were up front and said 'look, this is good for the environment but it's going to cost you more' than try to pass it off as a cost savings. When you have tricky financial documents that discuss tax rebates and financing over the course of 30 years, there's really no clear cost savings being achieved.
You do sell the overage back to the utilities but at a fraction of what you pay to purchase the same kilowatt from the utility company.
Once again, this is another example of how the government has never truly taken this seriously. The cost at which the utility company would buy the overage should mirror the cost to produce that energy via coal, etc.
Responding to the other individual now about being tied to the grid and being SOL with a power outage. Not all systems are like that. You would have a bank of batteries with a storage supply in your home. The more batteries you have, the better off you are.... so you do not have to purchase as much excess energy from the utility company at times when you have little sun.
I'll check this out.