Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The price of solar power just fell 50% in 16 months

electrek.co

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 448 posts

Re: The price of solar power just fell 50% in 16 months

#181

Post by brians »

michaelbuckbee wrote: post #114
warmwaffles wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How long until you start seeing a return on investment? Right now my electricity bill for my home is ~100 a month in Texas. I would need to keep the same panels without maintenance fees for 33.33 years by your price point of 40k

I've been trying to do this calculation myself. One factor I hadn't initially put in was the fact that I didn't need to think about a backup generator for our (east coast) storms.

You might—I do. Your inverter won't power the house when the grid supply is down. Why? Well, because if the grid supply's down, it's probably because there's a line down somewhere. Therefore there's a lineman trying to pick that line up somewhere. He's going to be handling both ends of a broken, downed line. The generator-side line is tagged out, that's safe. The house-side line? Well, that's up to you—and so your equipment will deactivate to avoid creating a safety hazard for grid maintenance staff.

Re: The price of solar power just fell 50% in 16 months

#182

Post by thinkcontext »

ChuckMcM wrote: post #103

The aggressiveness of the price drops on solar is pretty amazing. I just lost one of the inverters on my grid-tie system after it had run trouble free for 13 years. So we're looking at the first "major" repair to the system I installed in 2003. And in 2003 my 5.2kW of panels on my roof cost $38,000 before subsidies and $19,000 after. 28 panels, two 2.5kW inverters, net about 4.2kW of generation. I priced out replacin…

Why not replace your current panels with new ones? If you can generate nearly 3 times as much electricity with the same roof footprint and be able to reuse your racks and electrical installation, you should be able to be in the black in no time.

Re: The price of solar power just fell 50% in 16 months

#183

Post by m3mnoch »

warmwaffles wrote: post #107
ChuckMcM wrote: post #103

The aggressiveness of the price drops on solar is pretty amazing. I just lost one of the inverters on my grid-tie system after it had run trouble free for 13 years. So we're looking at the first "major" repair to the system I installed in 2003. And in 2003 my 5.2kW of panels on my roof cost $38,000 before subsidies and $19,000 after. 28 panels, two 2.5kW inverters, net about 4.2kW of generation. I priced out replacin…

How long until you start seeing a return on investment? Right now my electricity bill for my home is ~100 a month in Texas. I would need to keep the same panels without maintenance fees for 33.33 years by your price point of 40k

this argument kind of annoys me.

"yeah, but how long before you see a return on investment?"

how about instantly?

this is what we did:

1) calculated our monthly electricity payment: $160 or so a month.

2) priced out solar to push our payment to net-zero-ish: the savings really start multiplying once you get down into the regulated tiers.

3) replaced our electricity bill with a solar installation loan.

what did we get in return?

instant insulation from rate hikes: http://business.time.com/2011/12/16/plugged-in-then-pay-up-e...

instant equity on our house.

oh, and look! i can now have a solar-powered car!

but yeah, if i happen to still live in this house in 15 years, sure, no electricity bill. and, i'm sure somewhere along the line i'll end up "making all my money back".

Re: The price of solar power just fell 50% in 16 months

#184

Post by kragen »

dragontamer wrote: post #135
cmarschner wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

ROI can only be one factor. The other is that you are suddenly using clean energy. Doesn't this make you feel better?

The typical American median household income is $51k. Spending $40,000 of that on "clean energy" so that they can "feel better" is well outside of the typical person's price range. Even $7000 would be cost-prohibitive, especially if they're paying or saving up for their kids. A cold can of beer also makes you feel better. Its a hell of a lot cheaper too. The answer for the typical American is to wait for utility-scal…

US$40K was the cost when Chuck did it in 2003. Now we're talking about US$7000 over 25 years, which is US$23 a month. US$23 a month is not "well outside of the typical person's price range" in the US.

If you want to "save up for your kids", the way to do it is to invest your money in the investments that have the highest ROI, as long as you have enough liquidity to weather emergencies. Pay off your 23% credit card before your 17% credit card, pay off your 17% credit card before you start putting up solar panels that will have a 16% internal rate of return, and put up the solar panels before you buy the cold can of beer with its 0% ROI.

Twenty years from now, you'll be drinking your beer on the porch and sending your kids to college, while your typical American loser neighbors are whining about their credit card and electric bills.

Re: The price of solar power just fell 50% in 16 months

#185

Post by thescriptkiddie »

dragontamer wrote: post #135
cmarschner wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

ROI can only be one factor. The other is that you are suddenly using clean energy. Doesn't this make you feel better?

The typical American median household income is $51k. Spending $40,000 of that on "clean energy" so that they can "feel better" is well outside of the typical person's price range. Even $7000 would be cost-prohibitive, especially if they're paying or saving up for their kids. A cold can of beer also makes you feel better. Its a hell of a lot cheaper too. The answer for the typical American is to wait for utility-scal…

Solar panels don't have to be replaced annually. They have 30 year warranties as standard, and are likely to last at least 40 years. Spending $100 per month to eliminate your $110 (the us average) and rising electric bill makes sense even if you don't value renewable energy on principle. This isn't even considering the fact that you can sell renewable energy credits for the energy you sell back to the grid.

Re: The price of solar power just fell 50% in 16 months

#186

Post by ams6110 »

peppaz wrote: post #102
jmcgough wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My gf is an electromechanical engineer at a solar power startup (and obviously supportive of solar power initiatives). Just asked her about this, and she said that: 1) the electrical grid wasn't designed for transferring power this way, and it can damage the grid 2) because solar power isn't a constant power source (say, a cloud blocks the sun for a minute), power companies need to keep power available for someone wh…

Good thing Tesla is making huge battery packs for our homes so we can ditch the grid entirely.

I think it will never be the case that you can run a household solar/battery plant for less than a utility can do it on massive scale and just run a wire to your house (remember to factor in depreciation on all your household kit, batteries and inverters don't last forever).

Re: The price of solar power just fell 50% in 16 months

#187

Post by dragontamer »

jabl wrote: post #175
dragontamer wrote: post #160

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Indeed. But what's to stop utilities from purchasing or creating cheaper large-scale projects? I know you've seen my previous comments on Reddit with regards to Redox Flow batteries, CAES, and Pumped Hydro storage technologies. Utilities simply have access to battery-technology that the common people do NOT have access to. Some energy storage technologies only make sense in larger-scale 50MW applications or more. If…

Utilities have a lot of capital tied in their existing fossil fuel plants, and their economics are probably tied into running these at capacity for their remaining lives. So from their perspective it makes sense to lobby politicians to stall residential solar as long as possible, the environment be damned.

Last time I checked, it was the motivation of utility companies to make money.

http://www.exeloncorp.com/companies/exelon-generation/solar/...

Look man, you may not notice it. But the big utility companies out there are investing heavily into solar.

Re: The price of solar power just fell 50% in 16 months

#188

Post by dragontamer »

kragen wrote: post #184
dragontamer wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The typical American median household income is $51k. Spending $40,000 of that on "clean energy" so that they can "feel better" is well outside of the typical person's price range. Even $7000 would be cost-prohibitive, especially if they're paying or saving up for their kids. A cold can of beer also makes you feel better. Its a hell of a lot cheaper too. The answer for the typical American is to wait for utility-scal…

US$40K was the cost when Chuck did it in 2003. Now we're talking about US$7000 over 25 years, which is US$23 a month. US$23 a month is not "well outside of the typical person's price range" in the US. If you want to "save up for your kids", the way to do it is to invest your money in the investments that have the highest ROI, as long as you have enough liquidity to weather emergencies. Pay off your 23% credit card be…

> US$40K was the cost when Chuck did it in 2003. Now we're talking about US$7000 over 25 years, which is US$23 a month.

Chuck is replacing a $2000 inverter in just 10 years. If your emergencies include "fixing the damn solar panels that you bought", that's your own damn fault.

In any case, when middle-class Americans start buying solar en masse, I'll admit I'm wrong. But for now, I'm going to bet you that this is a luxury that is not cost-effective for the typical middle-class American.

It ain't like a Washing Machine, Refrigerator or Water Heater. I'll tell you that much.

Re: The price of solar power just fell 50% in 16 months

#189

Post by SEJeff »

kragen wrote: post #163
ChuckMcM wrote: post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is a slightly more nuanced question than you might think. First, I work from a baseline cost of $19K, even though the list price was closer to $40K I didn't pay that for the system so I use the actual cost in my calculations. Second there is the point where the money you've saved is equal to the money you paid, we hit that point about 10 years in. And then, depending on the life of your system (which has "positi…

I think you're being a little unfair with the S&P comparison: you should be comparing the returns on your actual investment with the expected returns on the S&P, not its actual returns. The stock market got a 5.4% return over that time, yes, but that's above average; we should expect its long-run returns to be close to the rate of economic growth, or more like 3%. And it could easily have been zero or even negative o…

Actually the markets are "supposed" to double every 10 years, which is said that on average over 10 years, the markets will grow 10% per year. Since the recession 8 years ago that has been much lower, but in general, that is the rule most industry people will give you. I work as a tech guy in finance and have for the past 8.5ish years.

Re: The price of solar power just fell 50% in 16 months

#190

Post by rhino369 »

stale2002 wrote: post #118
jmcgough wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My gf is an electromechanical engineer at a solar power startup (and obviously supportive of solar power initiatives). Just asked her about this, and she said that: 1) the electrical grid wasn't designed for transferring power this way, and it can damage the grid 2) because solar power isn't a constant power source (say, a cloud blocks the sun for a minute), power companies need to keep power available for someone wh…

Solar power REDUCES peak grid usage; it does NOT increase it. When do you think solar power is producing the most electricity? In the afternoon on a hot summer day. When do you think peak grid electricity usage peaks? In the afternoon on a hot summer day! Solar power helps get rid of the peak electricity usage problem. If anything, power companies should be paying solar users even more, because they are reducing cost…

It reduces peak grid usage on average. But you still need replacement gas plants on standby ready to start up when clouds go over for 20 minutes on a hot day. So you save money on not burning as much natural gas, but it doesn't reduce the amount of peaker plants you need to have.

I'd be all in favor of having solar power sell at the going rate that utilities are paying. But that's not how it works. And that's not how solar advocates want it to work.

Post reply on HN