Is there any rule of thumb for grid tie solar cost installed (indicate BEFORE or after 30% tax credit... ) including mounting, disconnects, inverters, tc..   I think the roof will hold something like 7.5 KW, perhaps a little more.

It varies a lot by location and project, but the average 5-8kw system in MA is running ~$3.50/watt, down from $3.75-4/watt in Q2 2014. That's the whole soup-to-nuts turnkey installation, before subsidy. Some bids are coming in well below the average, and higher efficiency panels (20%+ instead of ~15%) carry a 35-50cent/watt premium. YMMV- no telling what it is in your neighborhood. But even if it's $5/watt today, it won't be anywhere near that in 2020.  These people seem to think it's about $4.40/watt in VT, but that's probably SOOooo 2014.

SolarCity (the largest residential PV installer in the US) just open and office in NH, not sure which of the bigger solar outfits are targeting VT's smaller market. But the utility & state in VT are more solar-friendly than NH, or even MA, which is bumping up against previously set ridiculously low 4% of peak load net-metering limits in some parts of the state. In VT net-metering won't be revisited until PV output is at 10% of the all-time grid peaks, and even that may be expanded before it becomes critical.

In Oahu's heavily built-out(and still booming) solar environment some substation feeders have been backfeeding PV that is running at ~150% of minimum midday load. The utility had claimed the backfeeding PV was a source of grid instability and had been denying new solar going in on those feeders. Enphase ( of the inverter vendors) has long term minute-by-minute data logging on their systems had a huge database to mine that disproved that thesis, and even went so far as to claim that rather than being a source of instability, distributed PV was in fact stabilizing the grid, and could be even more stabilizing if a software change was made to allow longer ride-through of perturbations, previously limited in duration by regulation. A complete independent analysis & review of that huge dataset and subsequent testing of the revised ride-through upgrade by engineers at the National Renewable Energy Lab agreed, and they are now required to allow new solar until the mid-day peak output is at 250% of minimum daily load on any given feeder, at which point there will be even more data. Enphase was also allowed/encouraged to remotely download the software upgrade to their installed inverter base in all of Hawaii.

That is a much higher level of PV power than VT's net metering limit of 10% of peak, and in VT's PV friendly regulatory environment that limit will almost surely be lifted- the 10% was conservative to ensure that it could be managed without new grid control assets, but at the time that went into effect no one knew just how conservative it was.

In MA last fall there was legislation being fielded that would have lifted net-metering limits completely, with the implementation of a minimum-billing scheme for months when the PV was net-zero at the meter. They ran out of time on the legislative session before it could be voted on, and there are now competing variations on the theme being passed around. But while the state reps have been having their chat party, there are locations in MA that are more than 99% of the way to the 4% cap (which some of the utilities want to keep, protecting their shareholder interests ahead of the ratepayers interests.)

we just had a 9kw system installed on a new house; that was $2/watt after federal rebates & $3500 from the state.

About $3 a watt is a good ball park.

Try here for tons of info

Posted By gosolar on 29 Apr 2015 11:03 AM
About $3 a watt is a good ball park.

Try here for tons of info

That's a great ball park to be in but what does that number represent?

I've yet to see a quote before tax or rebate subsidies were applied.

But if that's the number after the 30% Federal income tax credit it implies a $4.28/watt pre-subsidy price, which is higher than the average quotes for high-efficiency panel systems I was seeing even in Q1 2014 (and they've dropped since then.)

So, which is it?

Thanks. No state incentives here. I've been probing a bit since yesterday and came up with a few $3.50-$3.55 per watt numbers from a couple of local installers. In this case around 6-7 KW.

There is some interesting discrepancy amongst installers as to what size will fit on my roof too. Perhaps different power density panels..... or just different panel dimensions making a more "efficient" fit. I.e., certain panels fit my roof shape better. I don't know. Will inquire more as we are closer to actually being able to do this. But the guideline is certainly helpful.

A commodity efficiency panel system will take 25-33% more roof area than a high efficiency panel array at the same power rating.

For a big rectangular roof not cut up with dormers, hips/valleys, plumbing vents and flues, figure about 9-10 watts per square foot for commodity panels, 11-12 watts per square foot for high-efficiency panels, subtracting out some free area square footage round the perimeter of the array.

The cost of PV is still falling. The $3.50/watt in Q2 2015 will be substantially lower by Q2 2016- probably in the $3.25/watt range. There's likely to be a real installer-availability crunch in Q3 & Q4 2016 coming into the step down date on the 30% tax credit (which drops to 10% on 1 January 2017.) After that point the quoted $/watt will still continue to fall, and the tax credit will be less, but it'll be easier to find an installer who isn't swamped with work in 2017. There's a chance the subsidy will be extended or amended with smaller step-downs or something, but you can't take that to the bank. I expect margins for the installers will be a bit fatter in 2016 due to the anticipated demand crunch, and it'll be far more competitive in 2017, and even with the evaporating subsidy the net post-subsidy cost may not rise much in Q1 2017, if it rises at all. Even without ANY tax subsidy the 20 year lifecycle cost of $3.50/watt PV financed with 5% money is still 20-23 cents/kwh, which is less than this year's retail rates for many folks in New England. With the 30% tax credit that's about 15-17 cents/kwh.

That does not include the solar REC credits you'd be able to sell into the NEPOOL market, the value of which will vary from year to year, and may be worthless by 2025, but it pays down the capital cost up front a bit faster for now, nor does it include any accelerated depreciation benefits you might be able to take on it.

WOW even at those prices ($3.50/watt) you are still getting a great bargain compared to Ontario Canada...

I just got a quote for an 8 KW net-metering system (complete and installed on the rooftop)... that's a ridiculous at $38000

about $5.50 a watt here and thats the best quote Ive had so far... its very discouraging...and there are NO incentives or rebated here

I thought most of Ontario & Quebec had a huge feed-in-tariff incentive north of 50 cents/kwh to incentivize solar(?) Even a $5.50/watt that can be a HUGE incentive if the FIT is as rich as it used to be.

http://fit.powerauthority.on.ca/what-feed-tariff-program

Most locations in the US do not use FIT incentives, and those that do or did aren't nearly as remunerative as what it has been in Canada, Germany or Australia. But it's a moving target- most FIT programs worldwide have been dialed back significantly in the past 3-5 years.

On 25 year financial analysis, financed at 5% interest and assuming a 15% capacity factor (typical of the US upper midwest, and New England) $3.50/watt PV (with no other subsidy) has a levelized cost of electricy is about 20-21 cents/kwh, which is at rough parity with New England residential rates, but more expensive than most Canadian power. After the 30% US tax incentive that's $2.45/watt, which works out to about 15 cents/kwh, which is still more expensive than the US or Canadian average retail rates.

At $5.50/watt the LCOE is about 31-32 cents/kwh. But if you're paying 11-12 cents for power imported from the grid and selling all PV power exported to the grid even at a 40 cent FIT the economics are still quite a bit in your favor compared to net-metering at grid-retail in the US, even with the 30% tax credit.

I don't understand it well enough... I am trying to learn.

The way it was explained to me was...

I am currently billed on a TOU (time of use) schedule with three price levels.... if I divide my bill (dollars) by KW hours (total) I arrive at an average billed cost which includes all the additional costs that move in parallel with the KWs like delivery, debt retirement etc,......... I arrive at about .22 cents a KW hour (CDN).

btw; I am very careful to use energy at the lowest tiers of the scale so as a percentage my bill is typically about 75% tier 1, 20% tier 2 and 5% tier 3.

I cannot control the time of use of the heat trace line in my lake water supply (that said I will be changing that system to a drain back water system in the hope of reducing the almost continuous 600 watt X 24 hrs draw to about 150 watts). I live in the very frosty north!

If I go ahead with the NET METERING system both usage and solar output are billed/credited on a two tier system...

any NET usage below 600 KW hours (month) is billed at the lower amount (currently about 12 cents KWH, any usage above 600 KWH (month) is billed at the higher rate at .?? cents KWH (both of those come with the various fees already mentioned and since the bill is about 50% fees and 50% usage the more electricity you use the more associated fees you pay.................. eg; 100 electricity use + $100 fees = $200 bill).

The salesman tried to talk me into a MICROFIT program but I can't see the point.

It seems to me that although the return on investment may be attractive it does nothing to reduce MY electric bill as ALL the electricity generated is sold to the utility through a one way meter while which generates income used to pay off the system in 12 to 15 years.

In the meantime....

I am 100 ft away still paying the full freight for electricity I'm using from the same utility (through a one way meter). For the FIT program I HAVE to generate the electricity on the roof top to get the full FIT $$$/KWH but only have enough roof top for about 7 KW.

The NET METERING system can generate power from pole mounted panels (I'm on 8 acres) and any electricity generated immediately reduces my monthly bill (hopefully to ZERO so there would only be a $30ish/month administration fee. A huge departure from my current bill.

If I don't "get it" please explain (slowly with small words)... I am continually pushed towards the MICROFIT program but can't for the life of me understand why!

If it was a business venture sure but as a method to reduce my electric bu=ill it makes no sense.

Thanks