Live data from Hacker News

Show HN: $200 Solar Self-Sufficiency Without Your Landlord Noticing

medium.com

111–120 of 192 posts

Re: Show HN: $200 Solar Self-Sufficiency  Without Your Landlord Noticing

#111
I've been using rooftop solar for many years; I live in an RV (for a total of about 7 years, spread across two different RVs, both with solar on the roof). I currently have a 400W system. It makes extremely good economic sense in my case, because it enables me to live comfortably off-grid for weeks or months at a time; which can save hundreds of dollars a month in RV park fees, when I'm traveling.

But, the talk of powering water heater, heating, AC, etc. from a little DIY solar system is extremely optimistic. I've done the math, and I couldn't run my AC from the number of solar panels that I could fit on my roof. I can fit 900 watts worth, an additional couple hundred watts on the truck, if I really wanted to get extreme and was willing to connect/disconnect them every time I drove the truck away from the RV. That's just not enough. It could power a small window unit as long as the sun is up, but overnights would kill a small battery bank dead (like dead dead, not just discharged, as repeatedly discharging below about 50% reduces the life of lead acid batteries by a huge amount) in short order.

With a big enough inverter and a bigger battery bank, you can run microwave or toaster oven for short periods of time (I do). But any big amperage device that runs for extended periods of time (like heating, AC, and water heater) is not in the cards for small solar systems.

Battery replacement also needs to be taken into account. In my experience, you get about 3 good years, and another year of limping along, from this kind of workload on this kind of battery. He's being more kind to his batteries than I am to my batteries (I usually end up running down to about 60% each day when off grid), so he might get another good year. But they probably won't even be limping along after five years.

But, the good news is that solar panels are extremely durable. They're often warrantied for 25+ years! And, the expected output after that length of time is still pretty good. So, if batteries get better, our systems today will get better just by replacing one component, because everything else is gonna keep working forever (well, cheap charge controllers die sometimes, but the panels are practically forever parts).

Re: Show HN: $200 Solar Self-Sufficiency  Without Your Landlord Noticing

#112
post #68
post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I really doubt the wind is going to pick up a 2'x4' ~20lb panel like that when it's flat on a roof. Now if he had lifted an edge to try and get a better angle with the sun that would IMO be a much larger issue.

No, that could easily happen. The parent was right, that panel should be secured in some way. Wind gusts can do some crazy things.

First, there are no hurricanes or tornadoes in that area.

So, you can work out max wind via historical data, but 85MPH is not going to be enough to move it over that lip. The skin effect around a building drastically reduces the forces involved.

Re: Show HN: $200 Solar Self-Sufficiency  Without Your Landlord Noticing

#113
post #55

A couple nice things about SF on this topic: 1. Davis Stirling (Housing related laws) mandates that building associations cannot prohibit owners from installing solar panels. Basically, they have to work with you to find a way and can't just say no. 2. As of this year, SF is the first city to require that all new buildings (10 stories or less) have solar installed.

How many buildings are being built in SF that are 10 stories or less ?

A darned lot of them. SF is very much a low-rise city, vast swaths of the city are no more than 2-3 stories. Part of why there is such a housing crunch...

Re: Show HN: $200 Solar Self-Sufficiency  Without Your Landlord Noticing

#114
post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I really doubt the wind is going to pick up a 2'x4' ~20lb panel like that when it's flat on a roof. Now if he had lifted an edge to try and get a better angle with the sun that would IMO be a much larger issue.

20lbs is nothing for a strong gust of wind on a roof.

Flat roof, low profile, is very different from even an 1/8th inch gap on a slanted roof.

Re: Show HN: $200 Solar Self-Sufficiency  Without Your Landlord Noticing

#115
post #56

Have you talked to your landlord about adding solar panels to the roof? He/she could install them and connect them to your apartment's service, which means you would get the power and the savings -- though you might reasonably expect some of the savings to go towards higher rents in the future. With the tax advantages, it's almost a no-brainer. It's even possible to apportion power between multiple units with PG&E in…

Doesn't PG&E charge customers who have residential solar installs a higher rate, because they have residential solar installs?

In a word, no. They do now tack on a monthly minimum fee that only applies if, over the course of a year, you use less than the sum of the monthly minimums. So, if you install a project so large that it zeros out your bill, you'll end up paying $100 or so per year to be tied to the grid. Otherwise, the rates are the same as you would pay without solar.

Re: Show HN: $200 Solar Self-Sufficiency  Without Your Landlord Noticing

#116
post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I really doubt the wind is going to pick up a 2'x4' ~20lb panel like that when it's flat on a roof. Now if he had lifted an edge to try and get a better angle with the sun that would IMO be a much larger issue.

Mother Nature is stronger than you think: http://i.imgur.com/3fqbBgY.gifv

Cars are much easer to move than a heavy panel flat to the ground.

And I am being serious here, if you notice to car rotated and got slightly lifted but not flipped into the air or moved very far. But most importantly, the wind is much stronger a few feet in the air vs 1 inch from the ground.

Re: Show HN: $200 Solar Self-Sufficiency  Without Your Landlord Noticing

#118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If we're getting into the nitty-gritty, then let's also include energy cost inflation into the equation. These numbers are for PG&E which is roughly equivalent for SF: 2001: 0.10c kw/h 2017: 0.28c kw/h (as per my recent bill) That's an average of 10% increase in energy cost per year ! https://www.pge.com/tariffs/electric.shtml

2.8x increase over 16 years is a CAGR of 6.6%, not 10%. (1.066 ^ 16 = 2.8)

Correction acknowledges!

Re: Show HN: $200 Solar Self-Sufficiency  Without Your Landlord Noticing

#120
post #63
post #54

Please bolt the panel down, if wind picks it up and blows it off the roof it could easily kill someone.

I really doubt the wind is going to pick up a 2'x4' ~20lb panel like that when it's flat on a roof. Now if he had lifted an edge to try and get a better angle with the sun that would IMO be a much larger issue.

>I really doubt the wind is going to pick up a 2'x4' ~20lb panel like that when it's flat on a roof.

thus the difference between the air speeds over the panel and under the panel in this case equals to the wind speed. To compare - Cessna wing loading is 15lb per square foot and it is generated at the minimum no-stall speed required by the FAA for general aviation of something around 70 miles/hour, and in that situation the speed difference between over the wing and under the wing is obviously significantly less than the 70 miles/per hour that wing moves through the air with. Thus it is pretty possible (to be sure one can just plug the numbers into any aerodynamics calculator on the web) that this panel at 8 square feet would generate multiple tens or even like 100lb+ lifting force at storm/hurricane winds of like 70 miles/hour and may pretty easy lift itself at the 30-40 miles per hour wind (which do happen on occasion in SF/BayArea). This is basically the same basic aerodynamics (Bernoulli speed difference) that tears buildings' roofs off in hurricanes.

Post reply on HN