On May 6, 7:52*pm, wrote:
On Sun, 6 May 2012 12:46:34 -0500, "NotMe" wrote:
"HeyBub" wrote in message
om...
"[The company] designs, installs, and maintains solar-energy systems
fitted to homeowners' roofs. Instead of asking for a big upfront payment,
it leases the systems. As the panels produce power, surplus electricity is
sold back to the local utility. Combined with the savings that come from
using less power from the grid, this will typically reduce the homeowner's
electric bill by enough to offset the lease payments."

http://www.technologyreview.com/energy/40352/?p1=A1

Some states (Texas) have a net billing law which makes the process much more
workable.

Other states (NC) you can't (effectively) sell the excess back to the
provider.

I expect there are states in between as well.

As for me and mine, I'd look at the process favorably but would be very very
careful of the fine print.

Typically you get 100% credit for the power you use because your meter
is not running but that drops of to around half when you are selling
it back to them because you are still paying for all of the fixed
costs, taxes franchise fees etc.
Your rebate is based on the actual KWH and it might not even be 100%
of that.
When I had the quote on a 2.3KW system it only made sense to me if I
could get both the 30% federal tax credit and the Florida $4/watt
rebate. That rebate program went broke and I let the deal go.
My proposed payback time was about 8 years with all of the rebates.
Without the Florida rebate it was one of those "I would have been 90"
kind of things ... assuming nothing broke or got blown away in a
hurricane.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

My net return on capital is around 16%. (Taking tax into account.)