https://www.sunelec.com/Clearance/So...modules.htmlOn
Sun, 29 Feb 2004 18:20:29 GMT, "Ed Huntress"
wrote:

What I was asking about is solar electricity generation. It still looks like
we're on a cloud about this one, in which the net effect is a loss of
energy, or a break-even at best, as well as very high costs.

I've seen a bunch of rationalizations of the energy thing. Ten years
is probably fair.

As for up-front cost, it's highly variable. Obviously conserved energy
is the cheapest of all. Do that first, then add solar, and the cost
isn't so bad. Worst case scenarios have the homeowner paying for grid
infrastructure as part of his home purchase price, and adding the
solar infrastructure on top. Then the current cost of grid power is
projected to stay the same for 30 years. What could go wrong with that
assumption? :-) Easiest way to reduce the payoff time to zero is to
start from scratch with off-grid property... if there's any in your
area, and if you're willing to live in the sticks. Most people can't
or won't live farther than a few miles from a Starbucks. Never mind
that vehicle purchase trends would appear to indicate that all the
Starbucks are soon to be moved to mountain tops. :-) Living without
electric scent dispensers, three dozen wall warts and 250W yard lights
is considered a hardship these days, which means that conservation is
also mostly out. So unless folks are offered a monster rebate, most
will say that they can't "afford" a system large enough to meet their
"basic needs". Not a surprise since extreme insulation,
high-performance glass, solar thermal, etc. aren't used as much as
they should be either even though they have relatively short payoff
times. It would seem that long-term thinking in general about energy
issues just isn't as fashionable as diet pizza or low-carb beer.
Hardly a problem tho', nukes in other peoples' backyards or
cold-fusion are sure to force energy prices down. :-)

But I haven't tried to keep up with this field for over a decade. If there's
something new, I'm interested.

Prices have come down, inverter technology is vastly improved, many
places have substantial rebates. The rest is still good old-fashioned
common sense though, no free lunch. People don't use the same payback
logic for solar that they do for sofas, candy bars, or liposuction. I
don't get that. I can tell you that taking a break from fabrication,
and spending it standing next to the solar array that makes the work
possible, is tremendously satisfying, and you'll hear that from most
anyone who has taken the plunge. Our own setup is now 8 years old. For
what we spent on the entire project, including a 2000 sq. ft. shop,
old tractors etc., we could have bought a pedestrian grid-connected
house in the rural suburbs with a two car garage and a new SUV to put
in it rather than PV. If we had, that SUV wouldn't have much of its
luster left by now. But the power system is as nice now as it was
then. If you want to read the gory details, they're here
www.citlink.net/~wmbjk

One other point about off-grid living - fewer (in our case no)
services. When there isn't a constant clammer to put in street lights
and sidewalks, property taxes can be lot lower. About $3k a year
difference between what we pay now, and what we were paying eight
years ago, when we were only ten minutes from town instead of 35.
Which means you could say that not only did the power system pay for
itself on day 1 by making the project possible and affordable, it's
already paid for itself a second time.

Wayne