Sizing Solar System for the home @ 80% ?

[bcroe]

That is weird. Why would that be, especially if the system is purchased, vs leased?? The new owners can simply
disconnect the solar system from the grid, if they so wish??

Not so weird, I might have feelings along those lines too. Which is why my PV solar is 500' from my house. Bruce Roe

[SunEagle]

That is weird. Why would that be, especially if the system is purchased, vs leased?? The new owners can simply disconnect the solar system from the grid, if they so wish??

It makes no sense to me either. Maybe people are concerned about roof issues.

[Remmy700P]

Not so weird, I might have feelings along those lines too. Which is why my PV solar is 500' from my house. Bruce Roe

You do realize you have significant line losses from a run like that, yes?

[littleharbor]

I am in the business of buying and selling solar equipment. I have removed quite a few solar arrays from residences being sold where the buyer does not want solar on the building. Can't say how common this is but there are folks out there who, for whatever reason, don't want solar.

[J.P.M.]

To those who think residential solar is an asset:

Regardless of what you, I, or anyone else may say, or think (or try to peddle because they have skin in the game), I try to keep in mind that that not everyone thinks solar is desirable or worthwhile, or adds value to a property. Valid or not, and smart or not, to the extent that such opinion exists in the market, the desirability of properties with solar will be affected.

I'm a big R.E. fan and I believe I know something about the subject, but for many reasons, if I was in the market for a house, I'd never consider looking at properties with existing solar unless there was a significant price reduction, or removal of the existing system, or both.

An an opinion only, I'd not be surprised to see sentiment come around to viewing existing solar as a less desirable feature as time goes on, particularly as new/better equipment becomes available, the 10 yr. old job on the roof begins to look like a dinosaur, and also as folks find out how many shoddy "Larry with a ladder" jobs there are. My HOA has more than a few of those and, IMO only, they're sort of ticking bombs. Time will tell.

[J.P.M.]

You do realize you have significant line losses from a run like that, yes?

I can't/won't write for Bruce, but after what he's described over the last several years, I kind of suspect he's considered that.

[J.P.M.]

You can't fix stupid.

Well, opinions are what they are, and they vary. Opinions are not necessarily stupid simply because they may be disagreeable.

[DanKegel]

I'd not be surprised to see sentiment come around to viewing existing solar as a less desirable feature as time goes on, particularly as new/better equipment becomes available, the 10 yr. old job on the roof begins to look like a dinosaur, and also as folks find out how many shoddy "Larry with a ladder" jobs there are. My HOA has more than a few of those and, IMO only, they're sort of ticking bombs. Time will tell.

So far, data does not support the notion that solar decreases the value of a house:

https://emp.lbl.gov/sites/all/files/selling-into-the-sun-jan12.pdf

[bcroe]

You do realize you have significant line losses from a run like that, yes?

YES. Engineering in the real world is a series of trade offs; I have the exact resistance and power loss of each
copper section. The 230' (one way) run from the array is at about 400VDC, as is 200' within the array, so losses
aren't too bad even at peak power. At somewhat reduced power (common under the
frequent clouds) DC losses drop (as the square) into the noise.

The AC run is longer, so losses can hit 3%. The extra high line voltage here does help, square rule again. Against
these, my list favoring a remote ground mount PV array has 22 items so far. Bruce Roe

[J.P.M.]

So far, data does not support the notion that solar decreases the value of a house:
https://emp.lbl.gov/sites/all/files/...-sun-jan12.pdf

Cherry pick all you want Dan. I'm sure I and others can find as much contrary data and puke it up in a post. I'm not sure what that proves except there's a lot of opinions around, with most of the printed stuff, pro and con seeming to be from people with skin in the game and money to make from the ignorance of others who read and do not think critically about it. I'm not sure how such an exercise improves the dialogue. In that sense, I think most of your stuff does more harm than good. I take all of it, from all sides with a large grain of salt and form my own opinions.

With respect to property values, a property is only worth what someone is willing to pay. That worth is a matter of opinion and opinions vary, can be manipulated if they are spawn of a weak mind, and also change over time and with circumstances.

You may have a study, or a hundred studies that show one side. I'm sure just as many are around that show the other side's views with as strong (or weak) logic.

[Mike90250]

A solar homeowner needs to educate they buyers, or it's pointless.

[DanKegel]

Cherry pick all you want Dan. I'm sure I and others can find as much contrary data and puke it up in a post.

That wasn't cherry-picked.
It's the best data I could find in an hour or so just now.
It tries to be objective. And I couldn't find any similar studies that found a negative value for working, non-leased rooftop solar.

Is there some data out there I missed? Or did I miss a problem with that study? I understand your opinion, but I'm looking for hard data, not hunches.

See also:

http://mobile.nytimes.com/2015/02/22/realestate/solar-panels-and-home-values.html

http://www.npr.org/2014/07/15/330769382/leased-solar-panels-can-cast-a-shadow-over-a-homes-value

[J.P.M.]

That wasn't cherry-picked.
It's the best data I could find in an hour or so just now.
It tries to be objective. And I couldn't find any similar studies that found a negative value for working, non-leased rooftop solar.

Is there some data out there I missed? Or did I miss a problem with that study? I understand your opinion, but I'm looking for hard data, not hunches.

See also:

http://mobile.nytimes.com/2015/02/22/realestate/solar-panels-and-home-values.html

http://www.npr.org/2014/07/15/330769...-a-homes-value

1.) Seems to me your 2d sentence contradicts your 1st sentence. A rhetorical question or two: As in "best" according to who ? You ?
2.) I believe I understand and respect your opinion even when I believe you dead wrong, but how objective something is, or to what degree it reflects reality is itself a matter of opinion. Not all data from all the things you, I or anyone else dredge up is good data, whatever "good" may mean in that context.
3.) I'm sure there is information we all miss. Maybe my opinion is wrong here, but I get the sense you do what those out to prove a point often do and look for data that supports a preconceived or ignorant notion, and don't have the time or knowledge or inclination or whatever else is necessary to play the devil's advocate as much as might be helpful.

[DanKegel]

I get the sense you do what those out to prove a point often do and look for data that supports a preconceived or ignorant notion

Nope.

I'm aware of the problem of bias, and I try to be objective.

If you have data that supports your hypothesis, please present it. Otherwise the study I linked to stands.

[J.P.M.]

Nope.

I'm aware of the problem of bias, and I try to be objective.

If you have data that supports your hypothesis, please present it. Otherwise the study I linked to stands.

I don't have an hypothesis, nor do I have the time or inclination to waste time in endless word play that comes to no conclusions. I have only curiosity and an opinion based on observation of what goes on around me, what I've done, and study of what's been written - by all sides.

The study you linked does stand - in your opinion. Mine too. It has some points and conclusions I agree with. But, while I believe it to be well designed, I regard it as no more than additional information by which to form/evolve my opinions, not a smoking gun of immutable truth. I would note that your cited study seems to imply as much - that it, it is not all there is on the subject.

In the end, I still contend that a thing, in this case a piece of residential property, is worth only as much as its perceived value.

Constantly touting any and all sources that support only one position or opinion will tend to skew such opinions and bias the perceptions. I'm not so naïve that I don't know that behavior is common and usual. After being a peddler for 10+ years, I believe it's the oxygen salespeople survive on.

I'm only saying you seem to do that more than is helpful to R.E., and I believe I can see through it.