|
You are not authorized to post a reply.
|
 Prev Next
|
| Author |
Messages |
|
ecobuilder
Registered Users
New Member
Posts:86
 |
| 06/15/2009 11:08 PM |
|
So here is a question for everyone. What is the installed costs of PV panels in your area? Don't get into the salesman pitch of tax incentives and grant money, just the installed costs before any Gov kickbacks.
The cost of solar panels has dropped dramatically over the last two years and the cost of an installed system here in MA is around $6/Watt . $3/watt for the panels and about another $1.50-2/watt for the inverters and mounting system and about $1/watt for the install. Smaller system the cost per watt goes up a little and larger ones the costs go down. I know this is dependant on the site and installation conditions, but just a general idea of cost to compare other parts of the country.
Thanks, Tom Pittsley
ecobuilder@aol.cm
www.eebt.org |
|
"Don't be afraid to go out on a limb. That's where the fruit is." Jackson Brown |
|
|
|
|
keiffert
Registered Users
New Member
Posts:1
|
| 07/01/2009 5:55 PM |
|
| $8.50 per panel in Eastern WA. We think it is a rip. The state provides incentives if you buy panels and materials manufactured in the state however no one manufactures in Washington. |
|
|
|
|
Rio
Registered Users
New Member
Posts:75
|
| 07/04/2009 10:07 AM |
|
Smaller residential systems are running around $6.50 - $7.50 for a straightforward installation in this part of southern California.
|
|
|
|
|
jimchoff
Registered Users
New Member
Posts:8
|
| 07/07/2009 10:58 PM |
|
| I just got a quote for a 6.8kW, ground mount system near Durango, CO. I provide the piers and trench to the house. They do the rest. ~10/kW. Too high IMO. |
|
|
|
|
Brock
Registered Users
Basic Member
Posts:444
|
| 07/08/2009 10:37 AM |
|
| We don't have a quote back yet, but in asking around to those who have had them installed around here is about $9-$10 a watt. I was expecting $6-$8, but it doesn't look good. It seems like they jacked the price up 30% knowing most will get the 30% Fed rebate... |
|
Green Bay, WI. - 4 ton horizontal, 16k gallon indoor pool, 1.8kw solar PV setup, 3400 sq ft |
|
|
flyingfish
Registered Users
New Member
Posts:7
|
| 07/18/2009 11:05 AM |
|
| I installed 5 kw of thin film uni-solar PVL136 panels on my residential airpark hangar roof and 4800 PV grid tied inverter. $5 per watt with my DIY installation. Do not know what is being quoted for installed systems |
|
|
|
|
Brock
Registered Users
Basic Member
Posts:444
|
| 07/18/2009 9:32 PM |
|
| I should add my 1k system (that I installed myself) was close to $6 a watt with panels, charge controller, batteries and inverter. If you take out the batteries it is closer to $4 a watt. |
|
Green Bay, WI. - 4 ton horizontal, 16k gallon indoor pool, 1.8kw solar PV setup, 3400 sq ft |
|
|
galnar
Registered Users
New Member
Posts:10
|
| 08/03/2009 4:51 PM |
|
| I can't imagine how it would ever be cost effective to power an entire house with solar. Just doing the rough numbers I come out at $80k+ plus for my usage in my current home. It would take over 22 years to pay that off if I averaged $300/month utility bills. I wonder if net metering offers enough benefit to shorten that payback window? |
|
|
|
|
Dana1
Registered Users
Advanced Member
Posts:702
|
| 08/04/2009 1:16 PM |
|
Posted By galnar on 08/03/2009 4:51 PM
I can't imagine how it would ever be cost effective to power an entire house with solar. Just doing the rough numbers I come out at $80k+ plus for my usage in my current home. It would take over 22 years to pay that off if I averaged $300/month utility bills. I wonder if net metering offers enough benefit to shorten that payback window?
Ay, there's the rub! The single most cost-effective thing you can do to make PV viable is to reduce the load to the minimum practical level. You can buy a heluva lot of purchased-efficiency for the price of 2kw of grid-tied PV. Cut your load in half (often fairly easy to do), then you're only lookin' at $40k of solar- cut it by 75% (more difficult & expensive, but still probably WAY cheaper than $60k) you're down to $20k of solar.
The deal with solar (& most renewables) is that efficiency is far more cost-effective than increased production- you can conserve your way to carbon-zero, but you'll never PRODUCE your way there. But you don't have to live in the dark to do it- in most US homes more than 50% of the power use is essentially wasted: computers & Tivos idling 24/365, phantom loads from power supplies even when "off", lights left on, low efficiency motors in compressors/pumps/appliances, etc. There are technology fixes/replacements for a huge amount of it, and some fixes are better than others, eg:
*Compact fluorecents produce ~50-65lumens per watt, electronically T5 linear tubes crank out twice that much, and with dimmable day-light harvesting ballasts & occupancy sensors lighting power use can be cut by over 90% from say, 75W halogens in recessed cans, with an increase in lighting efficacy due to reduced glare.
*ECM motors on blowers & pumps cut power use in handlers & hydronics by 60-75%.
*Insulating & air-sealing the hell out of your place can cut air conditioning & heating electricity use by 30-60% (in many/most existing buildings), then going with smaller high-efficiency AC and heating systems that gets cut again by 30-50% for a net reduction of 50-70% in electrical power use.
*Solar thermal panels for domestic hot water cuts elecrical use for heating HW by ~60-80% (sometimes more) for a tiny fraction of the cost of using solar PV to support that load.
(I could go on, but I'll stop here... :-) )
What's most cost-effective for a particular home will vary by a huge amount. But by no means should you just look at your power bill and accept the status quo as the inevitable, then based on that declare solar PV uneconomic. The average US home uses 10-12megawatt-hours/year, the average Japanese home ~5.5megawatt-hours/year. You can ascribe some of that to climate, but that would only account for a fraction of the difference. They don't live in the dark, and love their electronics as much or more as US 'mericans, but have somewhat more conservation-aware culture.
Cutting electricty use 75% seems ridiculous to most at first blush. But if you study the problem and do the math, the first 50% is usually pretty cheap/easy (getting it down to Japanese levels) and VERY cheap compared to the PV systems that would have been needed to support the 50% that went away. (In high-electric rate areas it can be cheaper than paying the electric bill too, when you calculate the present-value of the after-tax cash out-flow avoided.) The next 50% (to get the total down by 75%) requires a sharper pencil and bigger wallet, but that too is often cheaper than the PV to support the load.
Renewable energy is great & all, but it's purchased efficiency that will do the heavy-lifting, and have the biggest- quickest impact for the lowest up-front cost. When the cost-effective efficiency options have all been tapped, the size of the renewables required to support the load start looking affordable.
But it's a moving target- PV prices are poised to crash within the next 5 years for both market and technology advance reasons. Printable CIGS-technology and organic PV are increasing in efficiency annually, with production costs a fraction that of silicon. But silicon PV technologies aren't standing still either- very high German & Japanese subisdies have supercharged the industry over the past decade.
|
|
|
|
|
Sean_Campbell
Registered Users
New Member
Posts:2
|
| 08/05/2009 10:09 AM |
|
Where are you getting panels for $3/watt? The best price I have seen is $5/watt.
|
|
|
|
|
Alton
Registered Users
Advanced Member
Posts:662
|
| 08/05/2009 3:41 PM |
|
| Last week two companies in the Orlando area quoted me $7 per installed watt. I am ready for the price to get more reasonable. |
|
Alton C. Keown
Residential Designer and Construction Technology Consultant
Auburn, Alabama
E-mail: alton at auburn dot edu |
|
|
ecobuilder
Registered Users
New Member
Posts:86
|
| 08/30/2009 1:19 AM |
|
$10,000 for a 6.8Kw system, $1.48/Watt ? Something is amiss. I buy panels at wholesale cost and can't even come close to getting the panels for that cost, never mind installing them. Retail cost of $2.75-$3.25/ Watt depending on manufacturer, quantities and distribution lines. If you could share the name of the company installing panels at this cost, I am sure they will have more work than they could ever handle.
Did I miss interpert the cost is that $10/Watt. if so way off base. Ground mount systems do tend to cost a little more, more work for the racking system but not always. More work to construct the racking but you don't have to lump panels up onto the roof.
Here is a quick breakdown of cost for a solar install on average per watt. Smaller system the cost per watt goes up and larger ones it goes down a little. This would be for an average 4Kw system
cost per watt
Panels $3.00 $12,000
Racking/mounting $0.75 $3,000
inverter $1.00-$1.50 $4,500
miscl. wire/combiner box, breakers, $800
total material cost $20,300
typical installation $1.25/Watt $5000
Total cost of installed system here in MA before incentives and rebates $25,300
federal tax credit -$7,590
State credit MA -$1,000
credits -$8,590
total cost of installed system $25,300
tax credits -$8,590
total cost after tax credits $16,710
for a system that with decent orientation and lmited shading will produce about 4,300 Kwh anually here in MA
National grid electric rates vary a little but they are basically $.21/Kwh
4,300 x $.21 = $903 of annual electricity produced
$16,710/ $903 = 18.505...
about an 18.5 year payback if energy costs never increase. More likely with incremental increases this will be more like a 13-15 year payback.
While most people simple look at the payback, I consider added value to your home that does not depreciate to any real degree. A $25,000 system installed today will still be worth that in 15-20 years, maybe more. While solar panels have dropped in cost be a huge amount in recent years, I doubt that they will get much lower than they are presently. 15 years from now I would have to assume that the cost to install solar panels will be greater than it is today. I wish I had enough money to install a 4Kw system and become my own utility today.
Tom Pittsley
ecobuilder@aol.com
www.eebt.org
|
|
"Don't be afraid to go out on a limb. That's where the fruit is." Jackson Brown |
|
|
toddm
Registered Users
Basic Member
Posts:170
|
| 08/30/2009 11:21 AM |
|
The average electric rate in the U.S. in May was 11.86 cents/kwh http://www.eia.doe.gov/cneaf/electricity/epm/table5_6_a.html
The value of a PV system 25 years hence is a function of its degradation over time. I, for one, would not assume a life expectancy longer than the manufacturer's warranty.
PV's cost effectiveness will be dictated by technology rather than commodity and labor prices. Moore's Law held famously that the number of transistors on a chip would double every year. While one should not assume that PV prices will fall as fast as PC prices, the math is still quite different from producing, say, truck axles. |
|
|
|
|
a0128958
Registered Users
Basic Member
Posts:470
|
| 08/30/2009 11:51 AM |
|
Tom, using some assistance from Kyocera (see http://www.kyocerasolar.com/products/pv_calculator.html ), the payback period for your example changes to 11 years. While this is improvement from the 18 years you estimated, 11 is still a double digit payback period, and thus probably not good reason to make the investment if ROI is one's chief objective.
Here's a refinement of your 4 KW (DC) at an installed price of $6.50/watt example:
Assumptions:
Utility: NSTAR Electric
Rate: Net Metered 32 - R-1 Service
Annual Electric Bill: $3400
Energy Consumed: 15,800 KWH
Effective Rate: 21.5 cents/KWH
Annual Rate Escalation: 7%
Financing: 5 year simple interest note at 7%, with 10% downpayment
System Cost Before Any Rebates/Incentives: $26K
Less Total Incentives: $11.6K
Net Cost: $14.7K
Energy Produced by Solar System: 4779 KWH (30% of total need)
Excess energy produced by system that is in excess of what can be used: 0%
Electric Bill Savings: $1018 first year (30% reduction)
Loan payment: $3512 (for 5 years)
Time period to break even point: 11 years
Not included in the analysis are maintenance costs (probably minimal) and probable inverter replacement around 15 years.
Hope this helps.
Best regards,
Bill |
|
Real time energy monitoring system at:
http://welserver.com/WEL0043/ |
|
|
toddm
Registered Users
Basic Member
Posts:170
|
| 08/30/2009 4:37 PM |
|
So I go to Kyocera's calculator, plug in my zip code and electric rates in central Pa., pay cash for a 4kw system, assume 3 percent annual inflation in electric bills, and I get a sterling ROI of 5.8 percent and a simple payback of 18.5 years. A simple payback ignores the time value of money. For a true comparison of PV's worth, I'd have to compare its ROI to the 5 percent I'm earning now in GNMA bonds. PV will make economic sense some day, but that day is not today in central PA, or in most of America for that matter
BTW, the Kyocera calculator counts tax savings for taking out a second mortgage to buy PV, which it seems to me is misleading for the majority of taxpayers who do not itemize. |
|
|
|
|
a0128958
Registered Users
Basic Member
Posts:470
|
| 08/30/2009 9:18 PM |
|
I made similar initial observations, but got more knowledgeable over time as I used Kyocera's calculator more ( see http://www.kyocerasolar.com/products/pv_calculator.html ). (BTW, this is the most advanced ROI estimator I've been able to find.)
If you click on the 'more details' link for loans, you can put in a conventional loan with no tax benefits. For the example I did earlier in this thread, I put in a conventional 5 year loan, at 7% interest, with a 10% down payment. The calculator factored in the correct loan costs in the cash flow analysis.
The biggest thing that will make payback dramatically long is specifying a much larger system than what you can use. For example, if I were to plug in 10 KW instead of the 4 KW, return would deteriorate. This is because the calculator makes no allowances for those who have a utility provider to sell back to. So if your desire is to be in the business of generating a lot of power beyond your needs, and being in the 'seller' business, then additional calculations are needed that the 'calculator' doesn't offer.
In the example that I reworked, I had to make an assumption on how much annual power was being consumed. I guessed at around 3400 KWH to ensure that most all of the solar produced KWH was indeed consumed.
I don't think it's going to be correct to assume that future electric rate increases are going to stay down around 3%. My personal experience looking all the way back to 2002, is 6% compounded annually. I think a 7% assumption is conservative for the future, and is what I used.
And if you don't have access to credits or rebates beyond the federal tax subsidy, then I can see where payback gets out to the upper teens in years.
I think the market's at the point right now where the best you'll see is still going to be double digit years - somewhere in the low teens, maybe even 11 or ten years. But that's still a long time period compared to much quicker returning other actions.
Best regards,
Bill
|
|
Real time energy monitoring system at:
http://welserver.com/WEL0043/ |
|
|
a0128958
Registered Users
Basic Member
Posts:470
|
| 08/30/2009 9:23 PM |
|
Posted By ecobuilder on 06/15/2009 11:08 PM
... What is the installed costs of PV panels in your area? Don't get into the salesman pitch of tax incentives and grant money, just the installed costs before any Gov kickbacks.
I'm now looking at this for the Texas market served by Oncor (the utility distribution company that covers about 1/3 of TX).
Installed costs of Solar PV, for the Dallas market, appears to be centered at $6/watt (DC), plus or minus $0.5/watt, grid tie only. These companies include Infinergy, Green Ox, and Renewable Energy.
Best regards,
Bill |
|
Real time energy monitoring system at:
http://welserver.com/WEL0043/ |
|
|
toddm
Registered Users
Basic Member
Posts:170
|
| 08/30/2009 10:34 PM |
|
Bill, the calculator did net metering for me. The economics deteriorates because the monthly loan payment rises faster than the savings with credits and rebates covering less of the purchase price. Check it with the "pay cash" feature.
My 3 percent inflation factor is a WAG -- same as your 7 percent factor -- except for one thing. If annual electric costs of $1200 turn into $6000 by 2033, as it does in your scenario, there will be political intervention. One scenario: net metering customers get a worse deal so grandpa and grandma won't freeze in the dark.
BTW Pa has a very attractive rebate program. The payback sucks because rates aren't anywhere near 21 cents/kwh. |
|
|
|
|
a0128958
Registered Users
Basic Member
Posts:470
|
| 08/31/2009 7:31 AM |
|
Posted By toddm on 08/30/2009 10:34 PM
... the calculator did net metering for me.
... My 3 percent inflation factor is a WAG -- same as your 7 percent factor
Todd, you're smarter than I with the calculator. I haven't found any options that allow for putting in a price to tell it what the utility will buy back electricity at (or an assumption that electricity is purchased by the utility at the same retail rate as the utility sells to the customer).
I thought the calculator simply assumed that solar KWH produced in excess of what can be used is simply 'wasted off.' I'll go back and look again to see if I can find what you found.
My 7% number was actually based on one factual observation and one estimate. Here in TX, my actual price increase has been 6% annually, on average, going back to 2002. The estimate I made was that this inflation would get slightly worse (i.e., higher) in the future, and thus I used 7%.
Best regards,
Bill |
|
Real time energy monitoring system at:
http://welserver.com/WEL0043/ |
|
|
Ona
Registered Users
Basic Member
Posts:130
|
| 08/31/2009 8:21 AM |
|
I'm curious, in one of the above posts, it seems to assume that the utility will buy back all electricity that you supply to the grid. I believe in my State (NY) they are only required to "buy" the amount that you use. In other words, you will never get a check back from the utility. I believe they do it within a year. For example, everything extra that you produce in the summer goes in a bank for you in the winter.
I could be wrong, but this is how it was explained to me. Are there states where you actually can get a check from the utility?
Thanks! |
|
Ona
just trying to make my old home better
www.geochoices.com |
|
|
|
| You are not authorized to post a reply. |
|
|
|
ActiveForums 3.6
|
Professionals Serving
Your Location:
|