omfg let us ridicule these scum (C & P'd from National Report so as not to give them clicks)
<National Report>This week, a scientific research facility in Wyoming made a startling discovery that is certain to change the way millions of Americans look at the environmentalism movement, after they found conclusive evidence that solar panels not only convert the sun’s energy into usable energy, but that they are also draining the sun of its own energy, possibly with catastrophic consequences far worse than global warming.Scientists at the Wyoming Institute of Technology, a privately-owned think tank located in Cheyenne, Wyoming, discovered that energy radiated from the sun isn’t merely captured in solar panels, but that energy is directly physically drawn from the sun by those panels, in a process they refer to as “forced photovoltaic drainage.”“Put into laymen’s terms, the solar panels capture the sun’s energy, but pull on the sun over time, forcing more energy to be released than the sun is actually producing,” WIT claims in a scientific white paper published on Wednesday. “Imagine a waterfall, dumping water. But you aren’t catching the water in buckets, but rather sucking it in with a vacuum cleaner. Eventually, you’re going to suck in so much water that you drain the river above that waterfall completely.”
WIT is adamant that there’s no immediate danger, however. “Currently, solar panels are an energy niche, and do not pose a serious risk to the sun. But if we converted our grids to solar energy in a big way, with panels on domestic homes and commercial businesses, and paving our parking lots with panels, we’d start seeing very serious problems over time. If every home in the world had solar panels on their roofs, global temperatures would drop by as much as thirty degrees over twenty years, and the sun could die out within three hundred to four hundred years.”The study was commissioned in August 2011 by the Halliburton corporation, who wanted to learn if the energy giant should start manufacturing and selling solar panels domestically and internationally. Halliburton’s executives wanted to know more about the sustainability of solar energy and how photovoltaic technology might evolve over the next ten years. But based on the findings of WIT’s research in the field, Halliburton revealed on Friday that they will not be entering the solar energy market.“Solar panels destroying the sun could potentially be the worst man-made climate disaster in the history of the world, and Halliburton will not be taking part in that,” the company stated in a press release issued Friday morning. “It’s obvious, based on the findings of this neutral scientific research group, that humans needs to become more dependent on fossil fuels like oil and coal, not less. Because these so-called `green technologies’ are far more dangerous to the Earth than any hydrofracking operation or deep-water drilling station. What good is clean air when our very sun is no longer functional?”- See more at: http://nationalreport.net/solar-panels-drain-suns-energy-experts-say/#sthash.w1rwE6tn.dpuf
― KrafTwerk (sleeve), Tuesday, 27 May 2014 23:02 (nine years ago) link
oh n/m it's a parody site
― KrafTwerk (sleeve), Tuesday, 27 May 2014 23:04 (nine years ago) link
http://www.thermodynamicpanelsuk.com/
anyone knwo much abotu this
― Brian Eno's Mother (Latham Green), Thursday, 5 June 2014 20:28 (nine years ago) link
solar leasing vs. owning - which is the better?
― Brian Eno's Mother (Latham Green), Tuesday, 24 June 2014 20:58 (nine years ago) link
even w/o my knowledge of the industry, as a homeowner I'd never lease:
http://www.pv-tech.org/guest_blog/the_true_costs_of_solar_leasing
― polyamanita (sleeve), Tuesday, 24 June 2014 21:14 (nine years ago) link
leases don't make sense for residences afaik
― Οὖτις, Tuesday, 24 June 2014 21:17 (nine years ago) link
Solar Tariffs Seem Certain To Hurt U.S. Installation Market
― polyamanita (sleeve), Thursday, 26 June 2014 15:25 (nine years ago) link
http://www.revisionenergy.com/maine-nh-solar-financing-loans.php
thinking of doing this
― Brian Eno's Mother (Latham Green), Thursday, 3 July 2014 20:31 (nine years ago) link
Does anyone have any thoughts about solar roadways?
― noir-ish need apply (Drugs A. Money), Saturday, 12 July 2014 06:18 (nine years ago) link
(Is there a separate thread where it's being discussed?)
― noir-ish need apply (Drugs A. Money), Saturday, 12 July 2014 06:19 (nine years ago) link
fuckin Nevada, it blows my mind
thanks to WmC for the link
http://www.vox.com/2016/1/20/10793732/nevada-solar-industry-explained
not sure what can be done at this point, the brazen bait-and-switch move here is just insane
― the 'major tom guy' (sleeve), Thursday, 21 January 2016 16:32 (eight years ago) link
yeah this is ridiculous and will bite them in the ass
― Οὖτις, Thursday, 21 January 2016 17:22 (eight years ago) link
they're not the only states where investor-owned utilities are trying to roll back net-energy-metering - distributed generation systems are basically a death knell for the traditional utility distribution system model
― Οὖτις, Thursday, 21 January 2016 17:23 (eight years ago) link
awful
― Karl Malone, Thursday, 21 January 2016 17:25 (eight years ago) link
but no fear, the Republican Party is almost dead
― we can be heroes just for about 3.6 seconds (Dr Morbius), Thursday, 21 January 2016 17:28 (eight years ago) link
PUC is caving on the retroactive issue, hopefully:
https://www.greentechmedia.com/articles/read/nevada-puc-to-reconsider-grandfathering-rooftop-solar-customers-into-new-ne
― the 'major tom guy' (sleeve), Friday, 22 January 2016 19:59 (eight years ago) link
there's no way this entire debacle doesn't get reversed at some pt imo - either because of lawsuits or political pressure
― Οὖτις, Friday, 22 January 2016 20:02 (eight years ago) link
boo
― Brian Eno's Mother (Latham Green), Friday, 22 January 2016 23:33 (eight years ago) link
I haven't posted or even been on ILX for a long time but this seems like a good time to decloak.
Naturally net-metering is important but providing parity payment is unsustainable and although the way it was handled in Nevada was utterly boneheaded it probably had to go in time. My understanding was that NV provided no-sunset for parity net metering payments and rather than closing the scheme for new installs pulled the rug from under existing owners. In a market with so many PPAs and people having bought into sola under assumptions of payback over time that was plain wrong.
Over here in Australia we've had all kinds of incentive scheme from Carbo based credits, generous (66c/kWh) and less generous gross metering, and net metering. Currently every new customer gets the carbon credit (Renewable Energy Target) up front and a net metering create of ~5c/kWh for the avoided wholesale cost of electricity. There is no credit for the avoided transmission and distribution costs and the benefit that that solar offers the network is not compensated for - that said the extra costs that solar customers (and those with big A/Cs and pools) impose not he network are not fairly distributed either.
All of this is leading to much more generous pricing and compensation models. We've had a regulatory process (called Power of Choice) which is leading to more cost reflective network pricing (Residential Demand Charges and or Time of Use) which will penalise A/C use and reduce the self-consumption benefit of solar (without storage). Further off It something I've been working on if the Local Generation Network Credit which is a proposed mechanism for compensating distributed generator owners for the value they do offer the network. It will go some way to recognise that solar on a residential zone sub at 2pm is not very useful but at 4pm it is very useful. There's a good description of the way it works in other jurisdictions in the briefing paper for one of the workshops I've been involved in.
https://www.uts.edu.au/sites/default/files/LNCVNM_towards_an_LNC_methodology.pdf
The TL;DR on this: this shit is complicated
― American Fear of Pranksterism (Ed), Saturday, 23 January 2016 05:35 (eight years ago) link
thanks, gonna dig into that when I have time.
I am sympathetic to the "costs of distribution" argument in terms of reforming net metering, but as you note the retroactive penalty was where the PUC really fucked up in NV.
― the 'major tom guy' (sleeve), Saturday, 23 January 2016 05:39 (eight years ago) link
CA PUC smarter than NV PUC:
http://www.sfgate.com/business/article/Solar-companies-and-customers-win-big-in-6790872.php
― Οὖτις, Thursday, 28 January 2016 20:11 (eight years ago) link
great news
― the 'major tom guy' (sleeve), Thursday, 28 January 2016 21:29 (eight years ago) link
congress looking into some pre-emptive legislation forbidding retroactive net metering changes:
http://www.pv-magazine.com/news/details/beitrag/us-senators-move-to-preserve-solar-net-metering-through-energy-bill-amendment_100023050/#axzz3z6VXCpq9
― the 'major tom guy' (sleeve), Thursday, 4 February 2016 16:06 (eight years ago) link
Hope that passes, good on them. Murkowski being in charge is of course disgusting and counterproductive.
― Οὖτις, Thursday, 4 February 2016 16:56 (eight years ago) link
Ah but when everyone has a telsa powerwall the grid will no longer be of any concern!
― Brian Eno's Mother (Latham Green), Thursday, 24 March 2016 13:43 (eight years ago) link
incorrect, those batteries don't store enough power to run a house, the stored power is used for peak shaving and load reduction
they also quietly discontinued the larger model last week:
http://www.greentechmedia.com/articles/read/Tesla-Discontinues-10kWh-Powerwall-Home-Battery
cuz guess what? they are just too expensive.
― the 'major tom guy' (sleeve), Thursday, 24 March 2016 14:16 (eight years ago) link
sad lol
someone really needs to crack this battery storage issue
― Οὖτις, Thursday, 24 March 2016 19:44 (eight years ago) link
i'm probably going to do a solar lease. I know this doesn't give me the tax benefits purchase would do, but I already owe the IRS money so on a monthly basis leasing saves me more. I'm guessing that CA already worked out the issues that are plaguing NV and ruining the industry for them over there.
― akm, Thursday, 24 March 2016 19:46 (eight years ago) link
recent CA PUC ruling preserving net metering is posted upthread
― Οὖτις, Thursday, 24 March 2016 19:50 (eight years ago) link
oddly I JUST NOW got a CREDO email saying that they are challenging that. Fuckers.
― akm, Thursday, 24 March 2016 19:53 (eight years ago) link
http://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/news/2016/mar/08/utilities-net-metering-decision/
so not gonna happen
― Οὖτις, Thursday, 24 March 2016 19:54 (eight years ago) link
good range of comments on that article
― the late great, Thursday, 24 March 2016 20:07 (eight years ago) link
Galatians! lol
― Οὖτις, Thursday, 24 March 2016 20:13 (eight years ago) link
the key is to convert solar power to heated magma to be used later!
― Brian Eno's Mother (Latham Green), Friday, 25 March 2016 19:55 (eight years ago) link
https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2016/12/the-solar-industry-has-paid-off-its-carbon-debts/510308/
― sleeve, Wednesday, 14 December 2016 20:45 (seven years ago) link
Well that's neat
― THE SKURJ OF FAKE NEWS. (kingfish), Wednesday, 14 December 2016 23:50 (seven years ago) link
more trade war details for anyone who is interested
https://www.greentechmedia.com/articles/read/suniva-solarworld-file-new-trade-remedy-proposals#gs.96pEz6E
as I mentioned in the Global Warming thread, one of the big problems with all of this is that four years isn't a long enough window to actually build cell factories if the tariffs that make them cost-effective disappear after that point.
― sleeve, Monday, 2 October 2017 17:50 (six years ago) link
Circa 1980 I bought a Casio solar-powered calculator, just the kind that does basic arithmetic operations. It has only just now bit the dust, after providing me with 37 years of faithful service and not a single battery required, let alone daily recharging. It was perfection of its kind. Of course, with mobile phones now performing the same functions, I will never be able to replace it.
― A is for (Aimless), Monday, 2 October 2017 23:07 (six years ago) link
Ha! I have such a Casio, bought at about the same time, and it's still working fine.
― nickn, Monday, 2 October 2017 23:18 (six years ago) link
Mine was dropped once too often.
― A is for (Aimless), Monday, 2 October 2017 23:24 (six years ago) link
waiting for the penny to drop on Monday w/r/t tariffs or cell quotas
this speech does not bode well:
http://www.smh.com.au/world/us-will-no-longer-be-taken-advantage-of-on-trade-trumps-sharp-rebuke-to-china-20171110-gzj60v.html
― sleeve, Friday, 10 November 2017 17:04 (six years ago) link
idk that reads like his usual empty bluster
― Οὖτις, Friday, 10 November 2017 17:06 (six years ago) link
and nothing specific about the solar tariff issue
I know, I'm just paranoid.
The ITC recommended like four different options, nobody has any idea what's going to happen and it's the uncertainty that's wearing on me
― sleeve, Friday, 10 November 2017 17:08 (six years ago) link
60 more days of misery, uncertainly, market disruption, and fear. This is the worst.
https://pv-magazine-usa.com/2017/11/13/the-clock-ticks-itc-turns-section-201-over-to-president-trump/
pv magazine staff has found no sources that can tell us more about this confidential report, and ITC staff has stated that a public version will be released at an unspecified later date. {...}
In other words, President Trump can do just about anything. There are precious few limitations, but these include that initial trade action can last four years (and be extended to up to eight years), and that tariffs are limited to 50% of the price of products “above the rate existing before the proclamation of action”.
This last detail may be more complex than it first appears. While all the commissioners who recommended import duties would have the tariff values calculated on the cost when solar products enter the nation, SolarWorld and Suniva have asked for duties equal to 50% of the prices during timeframes covering previous years when solar cells and modules were much more expensive.
Neither SolarWorld nor Suniva has done much to mitigate these proposals, which we at pv magazine feel are dangerous and unreasonable.
― sleeve, Tuesday, 14 November 2017 18:39 (six years ago) link
"uncertainty"
― sleeve, Tuesday, 14 November 2017 18:40 (six years ago) link
dumbfucks
― Οὖτις, Tuesday, 14 November 2017 18:43 (six years ago) link
both of those companies can burn in hell, forever
so selfish and stupid
― sleeve, Tuesday, 14 November 2017 18:44 (six years ago) link
yeah it's rather remarkable
― Οὖτις, Tuesday, 14 November 2017 19:02 (six years ago) link
The guy I talked to was great, helped a lot. Estimated payback time with more efficient and reliable (which is to say, more expensive) panels could be about 7 years, which is not bad. And cost would in theory be reduced by 40% or so once you take into account tax rebates and SRECs and whatnot, with a lot of that coming back to you more or less the first year. Though it's still a *considerable* initial cash expenditure. Obviously a lower outright price would be better than a higher price with a promise of refunds, but that's not where we're at.
I think my friend's thing with geothermal is that the energy being generated is constant. It's not linked to sun or shade or snow or cloud cover or whatever, it's just there, year-round. There is no degradation of panels or reduction of panel efficiency, there is no fear of needing (or wanting) to upgrade in the near future, and it covers the biggest drag on a lot of homes, heating and cooling. Of course, it costs a lot more to install! But for example, solar, the Panasonic panels the guy prefers (with iirc solar edge inverter) have a 25 year warranty, which is great ... except who knows how things will look in 25 years, in terms of technology and options and the like. A similar consideration is that when it comes time for a new roof, the panels have to be removed and replaced, too, which could add thousands to the cost. And so on.
― Josh in Chicago, Wednesday, 26 February 2020 17:27 (four years ago) link
There is no degradation of panels or reduction of panel efficiency
this is not a thing that happens, panels have a 25-year output warranty for a reason, and work for even longer as noted above
no fear of needing (or wanting) to upgrade in the near future
also not an issue - don't replace existing panels to upgrade, just add more on a newer inverter.
the biggest drag on a lot of homes, heating and cooling
OK this I agree with.
fwiw my parents have had many painful and expensive difficulties with their geothermal system, they have had no issue with the solar at all.
sure there's an early-adopter price tag still. but as you have seen, the numbers are good in terms of IRR.
― sleeve, Wednesday, 26 February 2020 17:52 (four years ago) link
My mom has geothermal and loves it, but is not really a candidate for solar.
And panels absolutely do degrade, however slightly. So says the guy I just spoke with and everything I've seen. The cheaper the panel, the quicker (or more) they will start to degrade. The more expensive the panel (like the ones he was pitching), the better they work and the longer they work before any significantly reduced returns (plus better warranties). Granted, around 1% annual decline in productivity is not that big, but that still means 10% after 10 years, and so on, which is not nothing. If we were to, say, want to sell our house in ten years, solar may factor as a selling point, but esp. if we can say it offsets 100% of the house's consumption. It's still good to say 90%, or 85%, but it may not hit that magic psychological number, imo, to get the ideal ROI.
And adding to the system in the future obviously costs money, too. Just things to consider.
― Josh in Chicago, Wednesday, 26 February 2020 18:43 (four years ago) link
it's way less than 1% a year degradation, more like 1/4 of a %
there's a reason they guarantee >80% output for 25 years, 1% a year would be a lot more than that
and yeah you are correct that "100% coverage" is often not a good idea in terms of ROI
― sleeve, Wednesday, 26 February 2020 18:45 (four years ago) link
Just googling I saw something like an average of .5% annual degradation, and that's linked, like output and efficiency, to quality, which is to say, cost. But yeah, that's a relatively minor concern. Degradation, not cost, that is. A higher priced system here would go for around $22K. A lower cost system would go for around $18k. Both are huge numbers, and if you finance, obviously that number goes up.
― Josh in Chicago, Wednesday, 26 February 2020 18:55 (four years ago) link
fwiw that amount sounds just about right for installed cost on 5-6 KW
― sleeve, Wednesday, 26 February 2020 18:58 (four years ago) link
I just got his formal pitch, if you're curious, but it includes:
Panel degradation rate: 3% in year 1; 0.26% years 2-25 - 90% efficient @ yr 25
― Josh in Chicago, Wednesday, 26 February 2020 19:00 (four years ago) link
ah that's really interesting! thanks. I did not know that more degradation was assumed in year 1.
― sleeve, Wednesday, 26 February 2020 19:01 (four years ago) link
After saying my roof isn't great for solar I'm now starting to thing I should jump on this. The Roof is bad because it is flat and mainly taken up by my roof deck, but havingng Saturday up their a lot the shading on the exposed parts isn't actually as bad as I thought and now you can get a 400W standard size panel(SunPower), I could actually get some useful production out of it. There's an outside chance I could squeeze 6 on the eastern end of the roof and 2 on the western end, really its probably 4 and 2 but that could still be 2.4kW. Panels would probably have to be flat rather than on tilt frames or the homeowners association would flip and the shading means I'd have to have micro inverters (Enphase) or optimisers (SolarEdge) to get the best out of a system.
I've had the Enphase option priced out and it comes in at AU$3.74/W which makes me wince, especially as we won't qualify for the current VIC government rebate which would bring that down. I've got a mate going through the same process and his (much bigger) system is quoted out at $1.22/W or AU$1.08/W if he gets the rebate. Thats on a SolarEdge System with optimisers and and Longi 350W Mono PERC panels.
Not that it's really about payback but It would take me about 10 years to breakeven on that
― American Fear of Pranksterism (Ed), Wednesday, 11 March 2020 05:41 (four years ago) link
26% solar tax credit extended for 2 years as part of the COVID bill, definitely a good thing
https://www.solarpowerworldonline.com/2020/12/solar-investment-tax-credit-extended-at-26-for-two-additional-years/
― howls of non-specificity (sleeve), Tuesday, 22 December 2020 21:48 (three years ago) link
even better news
https://pv-magazine-usa.com/2022/07/28/solar-investment-tax-credit-to-be-extended-10-years-at-30/
― thinkmanship (sleeve), Thursday, 11 August 2022 17:03 (one year ago) link
Dunno if I mentioned it, but we did end up getting solar and have been very happy with it so far.
― Josh in Chicago, Thursday, 11 August 2022 18:13 (one year ago) link
what inverter type, do you know?
― thinkmanship (sleeve), Thursday, 11 August 2022 18:54 (one year ago) link
also, Josh, note this key provision:
"The tax credit applies to residential adopters of solar technology. If the bill is passed, the 30% credit will be retroactively applied to anyone who installed their system since the beginning of 2022."
― thinkmanship (sleeve), Thursday, 11 August 2022 18:56 (one year ago) link
We had it done in 2020, so already got whatever rebates and whatnot we were expecting.
As for inverter type, I believe we have a Solar Edge Single Phase Inverter with HD-Wave.
― Josh in Chicago, Thursday, 11 August 2022 19:06 (one year ago) link