On Friday, November 22, 2019 at 6:25:09 PM UTC-5, Scott Lurndal wrote:
writes:
On Fri, 22 Nov 2019 09:14:19 -0800 (PST), trader_4
wrote:

On Friday, November 22, 2019 at 11:55:56 AM UTC-5, Ralph Mowery wrote:
In article ,
says...

You can paint conduit but I doubt they had a lot of choice about the
location. In this hemisphere, the collectors need a southern exposure.
It is one thing that keeps them from really being attractive for me.
My ridge line runs north and south so half the day they would be in
the shade. I also don't like the idea of poking holes in my roof. I
would prefer them on the ground but the neighbors would really hate
that ;-


The southern exposure was the deciding factor for me not to put in
anything solar. The house is longways to the road. That would put the
solar facing the road or it would take up the yard that is toward the
road. It would look ugly on the roof. No neighbors to worry about, just
me. The back side which would be fine for solar as far as the layout
goes, however it faces north and if I tried to angle the solar south
they would be in the shade.

I just could not see much savings or payback in my lifetime. The power
bill is is less than $ 200 a month.By the time I saved on the power
bill, the solar would probably be due for replacement.

Agree with everything but the payback. If your bill is $150, in ten
years, that's $18K and the after tax cost is about that or less.
The system should last over twice as long.


The problem with all of that is they don't talk about maintenance or
the fact that collectors don't really put out the rated amount of
power. Even here in sunny Florida they are telling us plan on the
rated power per hour times 5 or 6 per day. (not the 12 people might be
told) That gets worse as they age.
Add to that the fact that when (not if) your roof starts leaking, they
have to remove the whole system to replace the roof.
One good hurricane and it is all gone anyway.
I know panels are getting a lot cheaper and for some folks it might be
a good deal but most off that deal is tax incentives and a favorable
treatment forced on electrical suppliers by the government. Basically
you are being subsidized by your neighbors who don't have
$20,000-30,000 to put on their roof. Welfare for the rich.

It costs about $10k for a typical system nowadays with credits;

BS



and that won't change
much next year, even with the 50% cut in the federal tax credit. And
the payback period runs from 7 to 10 years depending on your insolation
and average electric supplier rates.

And they get cheaper every year.

Removing the system takes an hour or two, as does putting it back in the
extremely unlikely event you need to replace your roof.

BS squared.



Those panels are
quite light and the mounting mechanisms are simple to emplace and remove.

Hurricanes may be a problem for you, but not for the majority of
American households.

And it doesn't take a genius to realize that sunlight starts out weak at sunrise, builds
to a peak when the sun is overhead, and gradually weakens as the sun
sets. If someone tells you that the panels generate a constant
amount of energy as long as the sun is shining, more fool you.

A competent installer takes into account many factors when designing a
system to produce X KWh annually; including the seasonal insolation based
on latitude and any obstructions (trees, etc). The number of panels
will be the result of a sophisticated computer program that calculates
what's needed (a hand-held device that, when placed in the location of
the panels, will locate obstructions automatically, measure latitude and
azimuth and recommend panel placement and number).