Is now a good time to invest in solar?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Artman
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Solar Time
Click For Summary
Investing in solar energy in New Jersey is currently attractive due to significant state and federal incentives, including a $1.75 per watt rebate and a 30% federal tax credit, which can cover a substantial portion of installation costs. Homeowners can also benefit from Solar Renewable Energy Certificates (SRECs), which provide additional income based on solar electricity production, currently valued at around $680 per 1,000 kWh. However, the market value of SRECs can fluctuate, and there are concerns about the long-term stability of these incentives. The payback period for solar investments is estimated to be between 5 to 10 years, depending on various factors such as system size and energy consumption. Overall, while the financial benefits are compelling, potential investors should carefully consider local regulations and market dynamics before proceeding.
  • #91
The meter-reader came yesterday and found the reading over 300 kwh below the previous month (good sunny month). He said "System failure." I asked him what that meant, he said it kicks out any results too far below the expected average reading. It should be interesting to see the bill. I'll post the outcome.
 
Engineering news on Phys.org
  • #92
Artman said:
The meter-reader came yesterday and found the reading over 300 kwh below the previous month (good sunny month). He said "System failure." I asked him what that meant, he said it kicks out any results too far below the expected average reading. It should be interesting to see the bill. I'll post the outcome.

On a month with a negative meter reading we got a bill for +- $2 (not sure of the exact amount, it's home, I'm not, my wife told me the total). There are a couple of charges that are based on days tied to the grid rather than kwh used. Those amounted to the +- $2 charge. I can stand that. :wink:
 
  • #93
Artman said:
On a month with a negative meter reading we got a bill for +- $2 (not sure of the exact amount, it's home, I'm not, my wife told me the total). There are a couple of charges that are based on days tied to the grid rather than kwh used. Those amounted to the +- $2 charge. I can stand that. :wink:
By this time of year the utility/panels should be paying you substantially for your excess kWh produced, I would think? No summer air conditioning running yet, and we are <60 days away from summer solstice. I would think May might be your biggest pay off month, unless you don't use air conditioning in the summer.
 
  • #94
mheslep said:
By this time of year the utility/panels should be paying you substantially for your excess kWh produced, I would think? No summer air conditioning running yet, and we are <60 days away from summer solstice. I would think May might be your biggest pay off month, unless you don't use air conditioning in the summer.
Because of the SREC program, I can only sell back a small portion of the excess at this time (about 5% I think). We had about 300 kWh under the last meter reading. We can carry it to the next month, but we won't get back any money for it.
 
  • #95
Artman said:
Because of the SREC program, I can only sell back a small portion of the excess at this time (about 5% I think). We had about 300 kWh under the last meter reading. We can carry it to the next month, but we won't get back any money for it.
So you are supplying free power to the grid?
 
  • #96
mheslep said:
So you are supplying free power to the grid?

thanks, we all appreciate that...lol

this (IMHO) is why a separate off grid system is all I would invest in. Somehow the power company still wins

Glad your system is working good, and your thread is a great source of info for all

dr
 
  • #97
dr dodge said:
thanks, we all appreciate that...lol

this (IMHO) is why a separate off grid system is all I would invest in. Somehow the power company still wins

Glad your system is working good, and your thread is a great source of info for all

dr
Thanks dr. It's doing really good. The main problem right now is that the state still hasn't issued us our SREC code and instructions yet. It is in the works. However, I still think grid tied was the way to go. Our overproduction last month was around 300 kWh.

300 kWh is 30% of 1 SREC. They are selling for about $700 in NJ right now. So a third of an SREC = $210 in NJ.

Electricity is selling for approximately $.17 right now in NJ. so 300 times .17 = $51 in NJ.

Grid tied still looks the best to me. And we carry the credit for the 300 to this month should it be cloudy.
 
  • #98
Another update. I received my SREC registration number from the NJ Board of Public Utilities. Now I can start selling SREC's. It took about 5 months for the registration to come through from the date of system activation at the end of January. From what I understand, all of the SREC's produced prior to the registration number being issued are still credited to my account and can be sold. It's produced almost 5 now, right about on schedule to make 11 by the anniversary date at the end of January.
 
  • #99
Artman - what kind of daily kWh are numbers are you producing now that we are into June?
 
  • #100
Artman said:
From what I understand, all of the SREC's produced prior to the registration number being issued are still credited to my account and can be sold.
Are the SREC's value seasonal dependent? i.e. Can you sell them back on peak times. I would guess not.
 
  • #101
mheslep said:
Artman - what kind of daily kWh are numbers are you producing now that we are into June?

Well, the hot air does do quite a hit on efficiency, our better days are around 49 or 50 kwh (down from 55 or 56 in the early Spring), but we seem to be able to eek a decent output from a longer cloudy day, getting up around 25 or 30 kwh.

dlgoff said:
Are the SREC's value seasonal dependent? i.e. Can you sell them back on peak times. I would guess not.
Y 04:13 PM

They can be held to be monetized (sold) for the current year plus two years for a total of three years in NJ, so you can wait a while for the price you are trying to get.

I've just began an arrangement to allow an online company SRECTrade.com handle the sales. They charge 3% of the selling price, deal with the buyer and send me a check. I set a low limit (in my case $500.00 per SREC) and they try and get me as high a price above that limit as they can find. If I want, I can handle the sales myself and they only charge the buyer a percentage, but I think 3% to watch the market and find a good buyer is a reasonable charge.
 
  • #102
Artman, you do realize that it has taken all of my willpower not to flood this thread with little smileys every time you make a post, don't you?

:smile: ... :smile: .. :smile: .

No! Don't do it Om! This is the engineering section! They'll give you an infraction!

So, please. Given the SRE's, the cut in your electric bill, and the original cost, what is your current payback time for your investment?

And give us the answer. Was this the right time to invest in solar?

snicker, snicker.
 
  • #103
OmCheeto said:
So, please. Given the SRE's, the cut in your electric bill, and the original cost, what is your current payback time for your investment?

And give us the answer. Was this the right time to invest in solar?
I'll run the numbers again and let you know. I think with a decent SREC rate, it should be around 5-7 years, worst case about 10 years.

My original question wasn't really so much about the payback as it was the technology. I wanted to know if anyone here knew of any breakthrough technology that would make the old panels obsolete and very much more expensive. If the world was on the cusp of a breakthrough that would drive solar array prices way down or solar efficiency so good that fewer panels could do the same job. If the cost comes too far down, the market will become flooded and SREC prices will drop. Then payback would become an issue. Payback from electricity savings +rebate and tax credit, but with no SRECs is about 20 years.

OmCheeto said:
Was this the right time to invest in solar?
My honest answer is "no." I wish I had done it sooner (when rebates were higher). :approve:

I attended an energy symposium where I had to answer questions about residential solar. there were several others there who had solar arrays as well and, from what they have said, all of them are very pleased with their investments. I'll post more about this later, some issues to be aware of came up out of that day.
 
  • #104
Artman said:
I'll run the numbers again and let you know. I think with a decent SREC rate, it should be around 5-7 years, worst case about 10 years.

My original question wasn't really so much about the payback as it was the technology. I wanted to know if anyone here knew of any breakthrough technology that would make the old panels obsolete and very much more expensive. If the world was on the cusp of a breakthrough that would drive solar array prices way down or solar efficiency so good that fewer panels could do the same job. If the cost comes too far down, the market will become flooded and SREC prices will drop. Then payback would become an issue. Payback from electricity savings +rebate and tax credit, but with no SRECs is about 20 years.

My honest answer is "no." I wish I had done it sooner (when rebates were higher). :approve:

I attended an energy symposium where I had to answer questions about residential solar. there were several others there who had solar arrays as well and, from what they have said, all of them are very pleased with their investments. I'll post more about this later, some issues to be aware of came up out of that day.

Not to politicize the engineering forum, :rolleyes: , but with the gulf spill going on, I'd say your timing was impeccable.
 
  • #105
One of the questions asked of the residential panel made up of home owners with solar arrays was: "Knowing what you know now, what would you do differently?"

A man with a huge 28 kw ground mounted array said he would have had it set slightly higher. His is only 6" above the ground at the low end (mine is about 30"). He said snow bunched up around the bottom and he had to clear it.

A man with a 9.5 kw array mounted on the roof of a pole barn said he would ride past mine (he lives close by me) during those days following the heavy snows and see my solar array was clear of snow while his went for weeks with snow on it because the angle was too small (30 deg over horizontal, mine is 40 deg) and the roof was too high for him to clear them. He said If he had it to do over, he would put it on the ground at a steeper angle, similar to mine.

I said I would have done it sooner. :approve:

I can understand their answers, my best days were days with snow on the ground and a clear solar array.
 
  • #106
OmCheeto said:
Not to politicize the engineering forum, :rolleyes: , but with the gulf spill going on, I'd say your timing was impeccable.
Wow, yes that could have an impact.
 
  • #107
OmCheeto said:
Not to politicize the engineering forum, :rolleyes: , but with the gulf spill going on, I'd say your timing was impeccable.
Not sure how solar PV will help Artman to use any less oil in his next truck/car/airplane/train trip.
 
  • #108
Artman said:
I can understand their answers, my best days were days with snow on the ground and a clear solar array.
Really? More kWh on snow days than the Spring months? How do your sky facing arrays get ray line from the snow?
 
  • #109
mheslep said:
Really? More kWh on snow days than the Spring months? How do your sky facing arrays get ray line from the snow?
I'd have to draw that out myself, but they did. One of our highest instantaneous outputs that I saw on our monitor was 10.15 kw at 1:20 on Feb 18th a day with snow on the ground. Other snow days also did over 9 and 10 kw peak instantaneous outputs. On no-snow-sunny days the highest it goes is about design 8 to 9 kw. Today was a screaming sunny day and the best I saw was about 7.6 kw, but it held that longer and will probably end up around 50 kwh today. March did have one of our highest daily outputs of 57 kwh and earlier that week it had a peak day over 10 kw. But the snow on the ground days do appear to be good performers.
 
  • #110
Artman said:
I'd have to draw that out myself, but they did. One of our highest instantaneous outputs that I saw on our monitor was 10.15 kw at 1:20 on Feb 18th a day with snow on the ground. Other snow days also did over 9 and 10 kw peak instantaneous outputs. On no-snow-sunny days the highest it goes is about design 8 to 9 kw. Today was a screaming sunny day and the best I saw was about 7.6 kw,
Part of that is because of the 30-40 degree C temperature difference between then and now, but that still doesn't explain a nearly ~30% power swing, from a lower in the sky sun (then) to a higher one (now). Perhaps the panels have gotten a little dirty? A little banged up (from ice, blown debris)?
 
  • #111
mheslep said:
Part of that is because of the 30-40 degree C temperature difference between then and now, but that still doesn't explain a nearly ~30% power swing, from a lower in the sky sun (then) to a higher one (now). Perhaps the panels have gotten a little dirty? A little banged up (from ice, blown debris)?

Might be the fact that fresh snow has an albedo of almost 90%.

220px-Albedo-e_hg.svg.png


mheslep said:
Not sure how solar PV will help Artman to use any less oil in his next truck/car/airplane/train trip.

Leaf, Volt, Tesla Roadster or Model S.

Airplanes will have to wait for Ivan and his green slime fuel. :smile:

:smile:
 
  • #112
Artman,

First off, congrats on the successful installation of your system, sounds like its running great!

I am looking into building a 10 kilowatt system. We have submitted an application to the Ontario Power Authority to get a contract in there microfit program. They pay 82 cents a kilowatt over a 20 year period. Still doing the research but submitted the application because it takes about 3 months to be processed.

Artman said:
Well, the hot air does do quite a hit on efficiency, our better days are around 49 or 50 kwh (down from 55 or 56 in the early Spring), but we seem to be able to eek a decent output from a longer cloudy day, getting up around 25 or 30 kwh.

So are you saying on days were its pretty much overcast all days and really no direct sunlight you get about 25 to 30 khw per day with your 8.8 kilowatt system? Have you ever got anything lower then 20 khw in a day?

Artman said:
One of the questions asked of the residential panel made up of home owners with solar arrays was: "Knowing what you know now, what would you do differently?"

A man with a huge 28 kw ground mounted array said he would have had it set slightly higher. His is only 6" above the ground at the low end (mine is about 30"). He said snow bunched up around the bottom and he had to clear it.

Have you worked our a rough average daily kwh generation rate yet for the 5-6 months you have been operation, or are you just happy with its performance now and letting it do its thing?

A man with a 9.5 kw array mounted on the roof of a pole barn said he would ride past mine (he lives close by me) during those days following the heavy snows and see my solar array was clear of snow while his went for weeks with snow on it because the angle was too small (30 deg over horizontal, mine is 40 deg) and the roof was too high for him to clear them. He said If he had it to do over, he would put it on the ground at a steeper angle, similar to mine.
.

I have been doing some calculations using declination and determining the the max and minimum angles of the suns position at noon. (with a little help from in another thread on this forum). I'm trying to work out a good angle to have them tilted at.

You say yours is about 40 degrees. Does it ever change or is it always angled at 40 degrees?
 
  • #113
blimkie.k said:
Artman,
So are you saying on days were its pretty much overcast all days and really no direct sunlight you get about 25 to 30 khw per day with your 8.8 kilowatt system? Have you ever got anything lower then 20 khw in a day?
We had 3 days below 30 kWh in June the lowest of those was 7.64 kWh, probably raining. The other 2 low days were above 20 kWh. In May we had 7 days below 30 kWh, the lowest of those was 8.16 kWh, one was 11.59 kWh the rest of the low days were above 20 kWh.
blimkie.k said:
I have been doing some calculations using declination and determining the the max and minimum angles of the suns position at noon. (with a little help from in another thread on this forum). I'm trying to work out a good angle to have them tilted at.

You say yours is about 40 degrees. Does it ever change or is it always angled at 40 degrees?
Ours has a fixed position. Always due south, always 40 deg tilt.

Good luck with it if you decide to go ahead. Ours has worked out well so far.

Thanks for the comments all.
 
  • #114
OmCheeto said:
Might be the fact that fresh snow has an albedo of almost 90%.
Of course, but the panels are not pointed at the snow. Is there significant flux in atmospheric scatter? I dunno.

Leaf,
Not yet
Volt,
Not yet
Tesla Roadster
$109k
or Model S.
Not yet

Airplanes will have to wait for Ivan and his green slime fuel. :smile:
E-planes are certainly years away, but I think they're coming. Maybe fuel cells for awhile, but definitely e-motors. Just too many advantages.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WAp08b9_EuU
http://www.schuebeler-jets.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=102&Itemid=1", about 4KW per Kg power density.

http://www.electraflyer.com/gallery/videos/pure_electric.swf

Of course Artman's panels would have to put in some overtime to charge the full size version. :wink:
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #115
mheslep said:
Of course, but the panels are not pointed at the snow. Is there significant flux in atmospheric scatter? I dunno.
At 40 degrees from horizontal, the panels will be 140 degrees from the plane of snow. They would still catch light at that angle.
Also, as I noted back in https://www.physicsforums.com/showpost.php?p=2571575&postcount=67":

solar-panel-power-temperature-relationship.gif

x axis is 'C, y-axis is watts, ignore T < 30'C per the author.

The temperature of the panels changes their output significantly. I know that when I set mine up in the summer to water the volley ball courts at the beach, you could fry eggs on them.

450 watts/750 watts = 60%

I'd say Artman's panels must be better than my old Kyoceras with only a 30% reduction in output.

Ah ha! You could almost interpolate the panel temperatures from http://www.schottsolar.com/fileadmin/media/us/data_sheets/SCHOTT%20POLY%20220-235%20Data%20Sheet%20US%200510.pdf" :
NOCT 25'C
Power %/'C -0.45
30%/0.45% + 25'C = 92'C

Yup. Probably could have fried eggs on them.
Leaf
Not yet
My laptop sounded like a pachinko machine the day they started taking reservations:
leafreservations.jpg

All were announcing they'd put in reservations.
Volt
Not yet
True, but there are plenty of hybrids out.
Roadster
$109k
S
Not yet
Good timing:

Tesla_goes_public.jpg


With a little cash on hand, maybe they can ramp up production = economies of scale <> $109k/vehicle

E-planes are certainly years away, but I think they're coming. Maybe fuel cells for awhile, but definitely e-motors. Just too many advantages.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WAp08b9_EuU
http://www.schuebeler-jets.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=102&Itemid=1", about 4KW per Kg power density.

http://www.electraflyer.com/gallery/videos/pure_electric.swf

Of course Artman's panels would have to put in some overtime to charge the full size version. :wink:

I want one of those. :biggrin:
 

Attachments

  • solar-panel-power-temperature-relationship.gif
    solar-panel-power-temperature-relationship.gif
    9.1 KB · Views: 469
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #116
OmCheeto said:
At 40 degrees from horizontal, the panels will be 140 degrees from the plane of snow. They would still catch light at that angle.
Yes, but only diffuse light. Nothing normal to the plane of the panel. So the question is what is the impact of diffuse light. I dunno. Per Artman's results there likely is some impact.

True, but there are plenty of hybrids out.
Not Plug In Hybrids. Solar panels don't help regular hybrids at all, can't plug them in.

With a little cash on hand, maybe they can ramp up production = economies of scale <> $109k/vehicle
The cost is in the very large, custom cooled battery pack they're using (220 miles worth at full charge). The li ion laptop style batteries used by Tesla are already made in very large quantity.

I want one of those. :biggrin:
Me too
 
  • #117
mheslep said:
Yes, but only diffuse light. Nothing normal to the plane of the panel. So the question is what is the impact of diffuse light. I dunno. Per Artman's results there likely is some impact

Two words: Skiers Tan:

[PLAIN]http://www.skinet.com/ski/files/imagecache/gallery_image/_images/200909/Okemo_Goggle_Tan.jpg
Not Plug In Hybrids. Solar panels don't help regular hybrids at all, can't plug them in.
Hymotion can convert a Prius into a plug in hybrid in two hours. Why can't auto manufacturers do that? Is there a patent?
The cost is in the very large, custom cooled battery pack they're using (220 miles worth at full charge). The li ion laptop style batteries used by Tesla are already made in very large quantity.

Good observation. Why are we powering cars with batteries designed for laptops?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #118
OmCheeto said:
Two words: Skiers Tan:
I always thought that was from being above 2/3 of the atmosphere at high elevation and loosing UV protection. I don't see skiers tans close to sea level no matter how much or how long the snow's on the ground, but maybe I'm not looking.

Hymotion can convert a Prius into a plug in hybrid in two hours. [...]
Expensive toy I expect ($10k for the conversion?) Small battery, takes up the cargo room, etc.
http://www.popularmechanics.com/cars/news/4215681

Good observation. Why are we powering cars with batteries designed for laptops?
Tesla was the first out of the gate 5-6 years ago. That's all that was available then.
 
  • #119
Another http://www.technologyreview.com/energy/24498/" :

According to Harry Fleming, the CEO of Acro Energy Technologies in Oakdale, CA, these changes mean that the cost of a typical five-kilowatt rooftop solar system has dropped from $22,000 after state incentives are applied ($40,000 without them) to $16,000 in the last 18 months. Prices are expected to fall to $13,000 by the end of the year ($25,000 without incentives). "This is going to make solar a middle-class product," he says.
i.e. $2.6 per peak Watt installed, with incentives. About 15 years payback given average US electric rates, even without SRECs.Compared to last year's cost for a 8.8KW system in NJ:

Artman said:
[...]
Installed price $74,020
NJ Buy down rebate -$15,400
Subtotal $58,620

Permit fees $500
Subtotal $59,120

Federal Tax credit -$17,736
Total $41,384
Or $4.7 / peak Watt installed. That's a 44% cost decline in 2 years. I smell some kind of Moore's law effect here.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #120
Sold our first SRECs for $665.04 each. We had 3 qualifying so we made $1995.12 (minus the 3% service charge to SRECTrade for selling them) for a total of $1935.26.

That's more than a year's worth of our old electric bills ($1800).
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 30 ·
2
Replies
30
Views
3K
Replies
15
Views
2K
  • · Replies 108 ·
4
Replies
108
Views
12K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
Replies
2
Views
3K
Replies
19
Views
4K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
4K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 100 ·
4
Replies
100
Views
18K