Solar Panels on poss. unpermitted structure question

[CobyRupert]

If 10 out of 11 people on your block gets solar and their bill goes from $300/$500 a month to $100, the utility now only has 1/5 of the income, but the same expenses (i.e. the same amount of wires and poles and transformers, and work crews, etc...) to maintain.

If billing is based on usage (net kilowatts-hours delivered), the "the market" will correct and 1/5 the amount of electricity will cost 5x as much, so your bill will eventually be the same.
And what becomes of the 1 poor guy who didn't install solar (because he can't afford the installation) who is being billed 5x the current rate, but still uses the same amount of kw-hrs?
Your solar panels just made him homeless! eek: - OK, maybe that's a bit dramatic.)
...but what I'm getting at is:
I don't understand how the "market" (where everybody is in it for themselves) fixes this problem for utility costs that needs to be shared/distributed.

 

[LD1]

If 10 out of 11 people on your block gets solar and their bill goes from $300/$500 a month to $100, the utility now only has 1/5 of the income, but the same expenses (i.e. the same amount of wires and poles and transformers, and work crews, etc...) to maintain.

If billing is based on usage (net kilowatts-hours delivered), the "the market" will correct and 1/5 the amount of electricity will cost 5x as much, so your bill will eventually be the same.
And what becomes of the 1 poor guy who didn't install solar (because he can't afford the installation) who is being billed 5x the current rate, but still uses the same amount of kw-hrs?
Your solar panels just made him homeless! eek: - OK, maybe that's a bit dramatic.)
...but what I'm getting at is:
I don't understand how the "market" (where everybody is in it for themselves) fixes this problem for utility costs that needs to be shared/distributed.

The "fix" is that electric companies should only discount or "buy" the solar power at the same cost as they are buying it now.

Dont know if others itemize their bills, but my electric company does.

They charge me $0.0787/kwh for Generation and Transmission. Since my local Co-OP doesnt have any power plants....THIS is what they are paying to bring power TO their sub stations.

Then they charge a Flat $41 + $0.0266/kwh for THEIR distribution and local expenses/billing/cost of doing business, etc.

The FIX....is NOT to credit solar users on a 1 for 1 kwh basis. Rather credit them only the $0.0787/kwh that they are currently buying power for. Then it would have NO effect on NON-Solar users. But you would STILL have to pay the FLat $41 + 0.0266. That would simply be the convince fee of being hooked up to the grid, reliable power when you need it (like at night when your solar aint doing squat).

Dont like it....I say tough and go off-grid then and deal with storage, batteries, etc that as of now......the electric companies are doing for free with 1:1 net metering

 

[LouNY]

I believe that every state has there own regulations on solar power systems that are grid connected.
I know that National Grid in New York was mandated to accept a certain percentage of there customers
on net metering and that there are limits on how much you can install and net meter.
Some people are not able to net meter and will be using market price selling. Also on this district a grid tied
net metering system is not allowed to have batteries connected to the system and there generators
can NOT connect with the solar system.

As far as I'm concerned all generated power should be at market value.
On top of that I recall reading a report on the issues the European grid has had with
the so called alternative generating systems, the biggest one was the integration of alternative power
with the utilities generating systems. At times the utilities systems have difficulty ramping up and down
with the varying production of the alternative systems.
They have to have adequate generating capacity on line and hot standby to cover the dips and drops from
alternative systems to prevent consumers from experiencing over voltage or brown outs.
That equates to a lot of inefficiencies in generating systems having to have the ability to ramp up or down with
no noticeable effects.

 

[Diggin It]

To be honest, I'm not wild about homeowners having to do these systems. I would prefer that the utilities install solar and or wind where ever possible. They should be at every substation at least, sky view permitting. They should be footing the costs and maintenance if they want to continue to bill at the current rates.

There was also a push on to install panels on school and other public building rooftops, but I'm not sure what happened to that.

In 20 years at this house, I've cut my consumption by nearly half, yet my bill is higher due to rate increases. My monthly bills used to be in the $40 range, but now regularly run in the $70 range despite cutting my usage to around 15KwHrs/day or less.

 

[mikester]

The "fix" is that electric companies should only discount or "buy" the solar power at the same cost as they are buying it now.

Dont know if others itemize their bills, but my electric company does.

They charge me $0.0787/kwh for Generation and Transmission. Since my local Co-OP doesnt have any power plants....THIS is what they are paying to bring power TO their sub stations.

Then they charge a Flat $41 + $0.0266/kwh for THEIR distribution and local expenses/billing/cost of doing business, etc.

The FIX....is NOT to credit solar users on a 1 for 1 kwh basis. Rather credit them only the $0.0787/kwh that they are currently buying power for. Then it would have NO effect on NON-Solar users. But you would STILL have to pay the FLat $41 + 0.0266. That would simply be the convince fee of being hooked up to the grid, reliable power when you need it (like at night when your solar aint doing squat).

Dont like it....I say tough and go off-grid then and deal with storage, batteries, etc that as of now......the electric companies are doing for free with 1:1 net metering

In Ontario they dont netmeter for homeowners. You have to install a second meter and pay the same connection fees as the other line.
The income generated is paid to the property owner on title. You need a sales tax number and you need to collect and remit sales tax on all generated power. The actual tax benefit to the homeowner will be largely dependant on your tax situation and for some homeowners the benefits are minimal compared with the costs of setting up, operating and maintaining the system. A 10-20 year payback is a lot harder to justify on an asset that declines in value and effective power output. Unfortunately If you invest that same amount of money in something like insulation and energy conservation you will probably have more money in your pocket 20 years from now than by installing a grid connected solar system in Ontario.

 

[Gale Hawkins]

It seems solar, etc is more about the next generation than my greed. Solar and the likes may be more of a pay it forward type of thing.

 

[deezler]

The quality and reliability of the power my panels are putting on the grid is not worth the wholesale the power company must pay me. Yes, if lots of people are adding power to the grid during the middle of the day in summer when demand is high, it delays the need to increase capacity for the power company, but the power company is certainly not benefiting in the end. They were forced to send out people to inspect the system, put in a new meter, and talk with me about the new account. The only one saving money in this whole deal is me. I have a guaranteed output for 20 years at a fixed, one time, upfront cost. The power company is now only making $250/yr from me instead of over $1K. They paid for a new meter to be installed and cost them about 10man hours. And the biggest people being screwed are the tax payers. They covered the vast majority of the cost. Don't fool yourself by thinking people are "saving" money by me having panels on my place.

Rooftop solar: Net metering is a net benefit

Read the whole thing.

 

[jwstewar]

I'm certainly not trying to talk you out of it.

I just can't seem to make numbers work for me to invest in solar. Not at a 20yr payback on a system that hasn't proven yet to last much longer IMO.

Sure electric costs go up but that's an unknown factor.
In 10years my electric has went from about 10cents to 12cents per kwh, at my approximate average usage of 1800kwh/month

You are looking at it wrong. You are making the assumption that you will still pay your normal amount for your electric bill and that you are paying for the whole system now. By financing it, the monthly loan payment is still your electric bill. I'm looking at it as, I'm not taking on a new payment, just shifting who I'm paying it to with the caveat it is a fixed rate and won't continue to increase like electric bill has. Also, with a 25 year warranty, I have 5 years of "no/low electric bill". Even using a conservative estimate it will save me 250 a month on my electric bill (in todays dollars) that is a $15,000 savings. If it saves me $300 on my then electric bill that is $18,000 in savings. I'm looking at it as more of a long term investment vs. I'm going to start saving $300 per month next month. And since I didn't take $50k out of my savings (not that I have that to do), I'm not losing a missed opportunity there.

 

[bazman82]

Everyone has some valid points on here. After discussing it more with my wife, we decided to not go forward with solar. I realize there are incentives and tax credits and rebates but the cost of panels have gone down considerably as well over the last 10 years that I am sure that cost will go keep going down still as new technology is introduced etc etc. So I assume if that in 5 to 10 years from now if we decide to get panels that it would cost similar to what I would pay this year with all the rebates etc.

As the post above this one states, I was looking at it as the loan payment would be like my new electric bill. Slightly higher because I would choose a 10yr loan. With interest on that loan, it would be roughly the last 5 years of the warranty is where I would be getting a return on the investment. If I had the extra money laying around to pay cash then it would take 14 years to earn that investment back. It seems like it would be a hassle to go through all that when I can do what Diggin It states and just upgrade to more efficient lighting and trying to reduce electric usage where i can.

Just an edit as well: I found out that only the barn actually has a permit. The house never received an official permit. While it was being built, my wifes gdpa went to the town to get the permit and the town supervisor at the time told him to just build the house and we will get you the permit later (was in the 60's). Well the permit he never got later but he did get one for the barn in the late 60's early 70's and everything else was added on well before things were kept track of so the worry of people checking and saying its not a permitted structure I am not worried about anymore. I could easily argue that it was lost considering the history of the towns tract record with permits for this property...

 

[LD1]

You are looking at it wrong. You are making the assumption that you will still pay your normal amount for your electric bill and that you are paying for the whole system now. By financing it, the monthly loan payment is still your electric bill. I'm looking at it as, I'm not taking on a new payment, just shifting who I'm paying it to with the caveat it is a fixed rate and won't continue to increase like electric bill has. Also, with a 25 year warranty, I have 5 years of "no/low electric bill". Even using a conservative estimate it will save me 250 a month on my electric bill (in todays dollars) that is a $15,000 savings. If it saves me $300 on my then electric bill that is $18,000 in savings. I'm looking at it as more of a long term investment vs. I'm going to start saving $300 per month next month. And since I didn't take $50k out of my savings (not that I have that to do), I'm not losing a missed opportunity there.

You are also assuming the power your panels make will not decline or fade over time. Your also assuming the company is going to stay in business long enough to honor any warranty. And your also assuming that they won't try to find excuses to get out of paying for warranty work.

All too many unknowns for such a long time to recoup.

If/when solar or another viable form of alternative energy get down to a 7-10 payback....I be very interested in dropping some coin. Until then...I'll be happy paying the electric company