This topic is closed.
X
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Alisobob
    replied
    This month.... I sold 313 KwH's @ TOU peak pricing of $ 0.22 for approx. $68
    solar95.JPG



    I then bought back 51 off peak Kwh's @ $0.13 for $6.60
    solar96.JPG



    Clearing about -$60 for the month.

    solar97.JPG


    ....and Elon thinks I want to buy a battery from him?

    His battery is about 50% the cost of my whole solar set-up.... no thanks

    Leave a comment:


  • Alisobob
    replied
    When you suddenly have full sun, striking a cold panel... you get some pretty good output!

    Leave a comment:


  • OftheSeven
    replied
    Looks like you should be able to handle summer nicely.
    Cloudy forecast this week

    Just noticed something...my Enlighten account usually shows about 730-750 watt hours produced at the 11:15am mark on sunny days. I assume the clouds just broke and it hit 893 watt hours! Is that how the panels/inverters respond to clouds then sun vs. sustained 800+ on regular sunny days?

    5_3output.jpg5_4output.jpg

    Leave a comment:


  • Alisobob
    replied
    Originally posted by OftheSeven
    Bob, you run the A/C during the past few days?
    Wonder how it affects your numbers, especially if you run it during the peak times in your TOU plan.
    solar92.JPG

    I have two A/C units.... one for upstairs, one for downstairs. Both units are the same, for a 3,000 sq.ft.home. I set both thermostats for 72 degrees, and let them run all day. It was pretty warm, with a high of 86 degrees.

    Skies were clear, some scattered clouds.... solar output was good at 41 KwH's.

    So , how did it go?

    On Peak: Noon to 5pm
    solar93.JPG
    It was the first time all month that I was a consumer, and not a producer during Peak . A tiny 2 Kwh's were charged to my account. It should be noted that the house keepers were here today too, for about an hour and a half. They had all the lights on, with 2 vacuums running the whole time. Solar did a great job, keeping up with demand.

    Off Peak: All other times

    solar91.JPG
    Off peak was about what its been for the last week. Friday was pretty hectic after school let out.... the kids were home with friends, wifey baked a lasagna for dinner. Then friends came over after dinner, and into the evening. Power use was higher than normal. We were dinged by SCE for 20 KhW's.


    So , in conclusion.... I had the biggest use day all year, keeping the house at 72 degrees all day plus all the extra stuff that went on, and my SCE bill for the day was :
    Peak: 2 Kwh's x $ 0.22 = $0.44
    Off Peak: 20 KwH's x $0.13 = $2.60

    Total for the day: $ 3.04

    Not too bad, considering...

    Let me know if you have any other questions...
    Attached Files

    Leave a comment:


  • J.P.M.
    replied
    Originally posted by MikeInRialto
    watts are watts.... regardless of the efficiency in producing the watts, the output is what we are purchasing.
    And in the same location, orientation and duty, equally sized arrays will produce very close to equal yearly output, both initially, and very likely for as long as most folks will own a system.

    That S.P. panels may degrade a bit less year/year is something we must take S.P's word for through accelerated testing. I'm not willing to do that just yet. First off , they have skin in the game. Second, accelerated testing may/may not cover reality as well as the seller may know, or talk about. Thirdly, it's a moot point: That lower degradation rate, such as it may exist is effectively impossible to verify for the average homeowner.

    Any actual additional output due to the lower alleged S.P. degradation rate may have a net present worth greater than the usual S.P. upfront price premium, but for my assumptions about future rates, inflation, etc. to work, those assumptions need to be less realistic than I'm comfortable with.

    If a homeowner is cramped for space, a more effective way of dealing with the situation is to reduce the load by about by very roughly 10-20%, thus reducing the required system size by that much and thus allowing the use of panels with a larger footprint and it about the same footprint as the S.P. system. Then, buying LG, Solarworld, Kyocera, etc., for about 20% less/Watt. The first benefit is the electric bill goes down, maybe/probably a lot more than 20%, especially w/tiered rates. Next, you're buying, say a 15% smaller system and on top of and compounding that, you're paying about $0.70 less net per Watt. Sounds like a win/win/win for a likely lower $$ investment in conservation measures.

    A back of envelope example:

    On 10,000 kWh/yr. usage in San Diego,, inland, tiered rate. Current bill is very approx. $2,475/yr.

    Say a 6 kW system is required to offset the entire load. --->>> 18 * 327 = 5,886 W * $4.50/W = $26,487 *.70 = $18,541.

    Now, reduce the load by 15%: the annual bill becomes ~ $1,900.

    The required system size to off set that load is now 15% smaller: 6,000 *.85 = 5,100 W.

    Replace the S.P. (327's) with 18 LG 280's.--->>> 5,040 W @$3.50/W = $17,640 *.70 = $12,349.

    Net system price diff. after tax credit: $18,541 - $12349 = $6,192.

    initial bill reduction : $2,475 - $1,900 = $575/yr. or about 23% reduction.

    I can buy a lot of conservation for 6 large and blow the $575/yr. on beer - at least until rate reform catches up with me. Seems a better use of the financial resources to me, but opinions vary.

    Another way to look at it: the S.P. system will save $575/yr. more in electric bill and cost a net of $6,192 up front. Maybe not a great return when compared to some alternate investment that will give you some annual return and STILL RETURN YOUR $6,192 AT THE END OF THE PERIOD. I'm a bit conservative, don't count chickens before thry're hatched, and assume the panels will have zero salvage (resale or property value enhancement) value. If I'm wrong I'll be pleasantly surprised rather than disappointed.

    Leave a comment:


  • MikeInRialto
    replied
    watts are watts.... regardless of the efficiency in producing the watts, the output is what we are purchasing.

    Leave a comment:


  • Alisobob
    replied
    Originally posted by russ
    That is fact.

    Trying to charge more because you claim something possibly works marginally better is never an easy sell.
    sp 3.JPG

    Duh.....

    First example..... 250 watts + 38% = 345 watts

    Second Example .... 250 watts + 31% = 327 watts

    This has nothing to do with lowering $$$ per watt installed, which is the goal.

    Sunpower wants you to believe you're getting something, for nothing.

    Leave a comment:


  • russ
    replied
    Originally posted by control4userguy
    Get a life? Tell that to Sunpower dealers, not me. What is your point getting down on a brand and citing only price then?
    You tell them - they are selling the highest priced stuff and you whine about it?No one is "getting down" on a brand. Sunpower is the highest priced and only required if you are short on space or want to blow more money than you have to.

    That is fact.

    Trying to charge more because you claim something possibly works marginally better is never an easy sell.
    Last edited by russ; 05-02-2015, 01:39 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • Alisobob
    replied
    Originally posted by russ
    Get a life - that a smaller footprint may control is usually stated along with complaints about the high price. You are whining about a non point.
    sp.JPG

    This is directly from Sunpower, It says nothing about "foot print" size... only that S/P panels work better, and J.P.M. has the opinion that they dont.

    Leave a comment:


  • control4userguy
    replied
    Get a life? Tell that to Sunpower dealers, not me. What is your point getting down on a brand and citing only price then?

    Leave a comment:


  • russ
    replied
    Originally posted by control4userguy
    ^The problem is wherever I go on this forum you are there banging away at one particular brand. How constructive is that? Perhaps if you had empirical data I'd lay-off. Maybe there are folks out there who absolutely need a bigger panel for a smaller footprint. I don't know, you don't know.
    Get a life - that a smaller footprint may control is usually stated along with complaints about the high price. You are whining about a non point.

    Leave a comment:


  • control4userguy
    replied
    ^The problem is wherever I go on this forum you are there banging away at one particular brand. How constructive is that? Perhaps if you had empirical data I'd lay-off. Maybe there are folks out there who absolutely need a bigger panel for a smaller footprint. I don't know, you don't know.

    Leave a comment:


  • J.P.M.
    replied
    Originally posted by control4userguy
    ^Never ends with you , does it.
    If I'm being presumptuous here I apologize: Probably the stick in the eye to Sunpower part, huh ?

    I welcome substantive, constructive criticism. I don't read either of those in your comment.

    You don't like it, don't read it.

    Take want you want. Scrap the rest.

    Leave a comment:


  • control4userguy
    replied
    ^Never ends with you , does it.

    Leave a comment:


  • J.P.M.
    replied
    Originally posted by silversaver
    maybe we'll check again in 10yrs and see if SP worth the extra premium.... Hope my cheap Bosch panels will last that long....
    At what you paid, you'll need to wait more than 10 years.

    Leave a comment:

Working...