Professional solar= financial scam almost every where USA vs regular utility rates.

[Cshama]

Im about 10 years from retirement and I think of things with the perspective of the 4% rule. If you have saved $100k you have $4k a year to spend.

I will save about $4k a year with my PV system conservatively. So in reality the system is worth $100k to me in terms of my daily finances. My system in fact costs around $20k after credits.

That's one way of looking at things.

[Cshama]

Big corporations are more powerful then government or people in this country.

[solar pete]

Hi All,

If we had no incentives here in OZ a 10kW system using good equipment say 370 watt Canadian Solar panels and a Fronius 8.2kW Inverter would cost between 13K to 15K depending on some install variables. At the moment with the STC's deducted it cost between 8K and 10K

I think you guys would be better served with a system like ours, all new solar systems installed in Australia with equipment on the approved list installed by licenced solar /electrical professionals are entitled to create STC ( small scale technology certificates) to which large corporate entities who spew pollution into our environment are required to buy an amount of STC's every year to offset the amount of pollution they create. This way you dont need to be paying a large amount of tax to get your 30% tax break, to me it seems a much fairer system to all citizens.

I really for the life of me cannot understand why solar cost so much more in the States than it does here, something is wrong, what are you guys doing over there?

[SunEagle]

I find that the solar industry is infiltrated with finance/marketing professionals who are good at putting together sales presentations that are "attractive" to the retail buyer because they manage to show some kind of profit to to the customer but in reality hide the real profit going to the finance people. This google project sunroof quote is a good example.... Quoting $3.50/watt when top tier solar PV panels are ~$0.50/watt wholesale. I don't mind - It just makes competing with them so easy...

Sales is everything. Just look at the number of car commercials that end in a "leasing" agreement. They make it all very attractive yet most of us know that leasing something ends up costing you a lot more then just purchasing it.

Again while I see the price of solar panels coming down (for now, remember the buy American call) a vast majority of people don't have a way to DIY an install because they do not live in a single family house or have property. Apartment dwellers will never become solar users if the effort is left for them to do it. Only with a community solar farm will they get to be part of solar club and I just don't see that happening anytime soon.

[solarix]

I find that the solar industry is infiltrated with finance/marketing professionals who are good at putting together sales presentations that are "attractive" to the retail buyer because they manage to show some kind of profit to to the customer but in reality hide the real profit going to the finance people. This google project sunroof quote is a good example.... Quoting $3.50/watt when top tier solar PV panels are ~$0.50/watt wholesale. I don't mind - It just makes competing with them so easy...

[Ampster]

I don't think khan dam is necessarily wrong. He needs to work on his messaging.
........

Starting perhaps with a less inflamatory/teaser title or headline.

[Ampster]

Hi All,

I just read through this thread, these are good discussions to have, .......
BUT I just gotta call BS on this gem.......

That is a good global perspective. I understand that solar installations are less expensive per Watt down under. Whatever the reasons for that might serve as useful benchmarks for the USA. I also saw some anectdotal information that the percentage of installations may exceed the percentage of those in the USA.

[J.P.M.]

Life is full of choices. With al the talk on the thread about what PV might cost and what it might save or be worth, for those folks who want the best financial return for their money, I'd suggest considering starting with a broader perspective and think of PV as an investment that will have risks and returns and compare it to other investment vehicles.

Simple to conceive, but the devil is in the details. Perhaps oversimplified, the task involves taking a certain amount of money in hand now and seeing (guessing actually, even if it's educated) how much it will appreciate (or depreciate) over some time span when invested or put to use in various ways: PV, a bank acct, stocks, bonds, real estate, whatever, comparing the expected return over your time frame, and choosing the investment or mix of investments that produces the best mix of greatest return at the end of the chosen period balanced against the financial risk each investment poses as well as the least amount of hassle each investment produces along the way.

The details require consideration of time value of money techniques, tax considerations and other concerns. The nuts/bolts can be as simple or as complicated as the person paying the bills chooses. FWIW, I've found that with a bit of work delving into the details of financial analysis the task often reduces the uncertainty that's inherent in dealing with future events.

An overly simple example: Say I have $25K and I want to find a place, or places (an investment), that will provide (in my judgement/guessing) the greatest return balanced against what are, as best as I can estimate/guess, the risks the investment(s) pose with PV being one of those alternative investments.

If so, PV's return will show up in the form of lower bills over time. Because PV seems to be highly reliable for the most part, I'd estimate the risks of lower bills not happening are small compared to, say, loosing money by buying a mutual index fund. But the fund may produce greater returns (or - be warned - a lot less) over time, and over a long(er) time fame, historically seems to have produced positive returns (for me, FWIW, and as an example only, my index funds have appreciated an average of about 3 %-6 % more most years than my cost/kWh electricity cost inflation ,~ about 4% more than the compounded cost of my electric bills over the last 13 yrs). However, for that risk of a stock market tank (small ??, or small enough that I'll take the risk ?) at the end of the period (10+ years ?) I'll still have all the shares of the fund I started with (worth more or, admittedly, less than I paid for them) including dividends that, (BTW) have either been reinvested or used to offset some of my electric bills along the way - with the detail that electric bills are paid with already taxed $$'s, but system produce electric bill offsets are untaxed, and so fund's dividend value must be adjusted downward in the comparison. Since fortune favors the bold (and slaughters the foolish), depending on my risk tolerance, maybe I'd take what I consider a small gamble on the fund or some other safer investment like real estate/whatever. Pay your money, take your choice.

One consideration among several for the PV alternative: What might the salvage of a PV system be ? That'll show up as the value the PV adds to a home (or business). Unfortunately or otherwise, just how much that might be is a very difficult and more subjective evaluation. Seems to me such a value is highly local and very murky in the determination as it's only worth what someone is willing to pay. I might know what it would be worth to me but that's probably a lot different than what the next (or previous) buyer thinks it adds to the value of the property. The stuff I've seen done on the subject seems to have been done by folks who know little about PV and are generally local, mostly real estate slugs, or under their influence, and so probably weighted to over value PV on a property. The several appraisers I've spoken with either don't know or don't care. Bottom line, it seems to me that used system value is hard to quantify in any way that's reliable.

[soby]

I don't think khan dam is necessarily wrong. He needs to work on his messaging.

There are certainly situations where solar is not cost effective and it is up to every potential customer to weed through the BS. Without any actual proof, I would argue that the majority of solar installer businesses are shady. If I had gone with the first quote from Trinity Solar, I absolutely would have been ripped off. By shopping around, I ended up with a system that will likely pay for itself in 5 years but there are benefits beside cost savings most notable battery backup.

Could I have invested the $35,000 in the stock market in 2019 and had a much greater ROI? Yes, but the 5-year payback is nearly guaranteed in Massachusetts if I stay in this house whereas there are serious risks to the stock market.

[solar pete]

Hi All,

I just read through this thread, these are good discussions to have, remember that opinions vary and circumstances around the merits of solar systems for people can change a lot from place to place.

BUT I just gotta call BS on this gem from khan dam, " After 16 years your solar inverter will likely die and cost $5000 to replace making your net savings close to zero." what crap, I don't know of any inverter that will likely cost 5K now forget about 16 years when they are more common, cheaper than now and better. So have holiday for a week khan dam you are giving me and others here the ****s, .....

[heimdm]

Solar isn't for everyone. If you can't write a check for it, then solar might not be for you. If your state incentives and electric policies don't favor solar generator, then solar might not be for you.

project-sunroof.png

[khanh dam]

And here is the Payback paying CASH without a loan. After 16 years your solar inverter will likely die and cost $5000 to replace making your net savings close to zero. I'm not gullible enough to believe the company will still be around 16 years latter to fix it under warranty. Other's are free to disagree. solar junk3.jpg

[khanh dam]

First - WTF is "right fighting"? Is that some new left-wing liberal idiocy?
It simply is not true that solar is a "financial scam in most of the US".

Actually it's right wing idiocy term made popular by a certain person arguing about the most ridiculous things just to prove he was right, regardless of facts. In particular it got very popular after Sharpie Gate, you know when a certain person circled Alabama on a Hurricane map to "prove" the hurricane might hit that state. Trying to keep the politics out of it, but ya know, you asked so there you go.

Any hooo. Here is a random home in Durham, NC exact address given and within the price range you suggests. With a loan google rooftop calculates a net loss of $8000. So much for the numbers giving a profit?

I suggest you actual read my posts and I would be pleasantly surprised if you took the effort to see what kind of return, the solar loans google rooftop calculates. if you can find locations that actually provide a positive net return on a solar loan please post them. North/ South Carolina, Ga, Texas and pretty much any state where electricity is around 10 cents or less typical are a net loss with a loan. If you pay cash up front or DIY, then that is different as I previously mentioned.

dont' believe me? Like I said before show me the data then. Data below for those that are interested.

junksolar.jpg

[RichardCullip]

I think California has that beat, especially now that they are trying to force TOU rates on every consumer.

Yeah, down here in San Diego, SDG&E's rates are pretty high. I've got small 4kW system that produces more than we currently use each year. I'm on the TOU-DR rate which for the summer months is $0.3492 for Peak, $0.3002 for off-peak and $0.2518 for super-off peak hours, as long as I stay below the baseline. If I go over the baseline there's an additional charge of $0.07506 per kWh. For winter months the rates decrease a bit to $0.2624, $0.2548 and $0.2463 (peak, off-peak,super off peak). I'm on NEM2 which, for this rate plan, has a $0.338 per kWh minimum daily charge which, so far I have yet to pay more than the minimum daily charge each month since I produce a bit more than I consume.

[Cshama]

I looked it up. Coned charges 48% more then other utilities on average. Why? I guess they bribed the right politicians.

Coned is about to start charging a premium for net metering next year. Not sure if I will be grandfathered in. They really are a bunch of crooks.