Tesla’s new Solar Roof costs less than a new roof plus solar panels • Hacker News Board

Re: Tesla’s new Solar Roof costs less than a new roof plus solar panels

#31

Post by werdnapk » Sat, Oct 26, 2019, 1:17 PM UTC

deelowe wrote: post #27

bArray wrote: post #22

I think a major challenge that is yet to be addressed is the fact that solar panels lose their efficiency over time [1] [2]. Seems like you're looking at 80% of rated efficiency after 20 years - and I'm unsure this includes failures. In the UK a 50+ year old roof is very common - most people expect a house to outlast them without anything but minor repairs. If I were building a house I would want something where it's…

In the US roofs last more like 25 to 30 years for shingles.

The manufacturer states 25-30 years for shingles, but it's rarely the case they actually last that long unless you're paying for premium shingles. I'm in Canada though, so perhaps the harsher weather has something to do with that. Regardless, in Canada at least, 25-30 years for shingles is not common; 15-20 is more realistic from what I can tell in my area.

Re: Tesla’s new Solar Roof costs less than a new roof plus solar panels

#32

Post by cpursley » Sat, Oct 26, 2019, 1:20 PM UTC

rjkennedy98 wrote: post #25

> It also lists $33,950 as the price after an $8,550 federal tax incentive. There is something absolutely astonishing about the fact that in America the way we have go about being eco-friendly is to give huge tax breaks to rich people to buy solar panels and electric vehicles. To think with all that money we could build better infrastructure and denser housing. Really boggles the mind.

Denser human scale development is the real answer. Electric cars and rooftop solar is not going to solve the massive suburban sprawl crisis. You can thank the federal interstate system for that (effectively subsidizing land).

Re: Tesla’s new Solar Roof costs less than a new roof plus solar panels

#33

Post by meerita » Sat, Oct 26, 2019, 1:20 PM UTC

rjkennedy98 wrote: post #25

> It also lists $33,950 as the price after an $8,550 federal tax incentive. There is something absolutely astonishing about the fact that in America the way we have go about being eco-friendly is to give huge tax breaks to rich people to buy solar panels and electric vehicles. To think with all that money we could build better infrastructure and denser housing. Really boggles the mind.

Why people has to paid more just because they're rich?

Re: Tesla’s new Solar Roof costs less than a new roof plus solar panels

#34

Post by cco » Sat, Oct 26, 2019, 1:21 PM UTC

bArray wrote: post #22

I think a major challenge that is yet to be addressed is the fact that solar panels lose their efficiency over time [1] [2]. Seems like you're looking at 80% of rated efficiency after 20 years - and I'm unsure this includes failures. In the UK a 50+ year old roof is very common - most people expect a house to outlast them without anything but minor repairs. If I were building a house I would want something where it's…

50 years? I have noticed that slate roofs are much more common in the UK than the US but still I see majority asphalt shingles, curious what y'all call them, on single family homes built within the last couple hundred years.

I wish y'all had some more thatch roofs but I suppose given the history in London, driving to the Cottswolds to see a thatched roof is probably fine ;)

Re: Tesla’s new Solar Roof costs less than a new roof plus solar panels

#35

Post by Someone1234 » Sat, Oct 26, 2019, 1:22 PM UTC

bArray wrote: post #22

I think a major challenge that is yet to be addressed is the fact that solar panels lose their efficiency over time [1] [2]. Seems like you're looking at 80% of rated efficiency after 20 years - and I'm unsure this includes failures. In the UK a 50+ year old roof is very common - most people expect a house to outlast them without anything but minor repairs. If I were building a house I would want something where it's…

UK roofs are made and ceramic and slate. US roofs are made of asphalt. Mostly because asphalt is inexpensive (particularly due to economies of scale/lack of them on ceramic). Ceramic lasts a lifetime, asphalt can be taken out by one bad hail storm.

UK homes are made of brick. US homes are made of fiberboard and inexpensive woods. There's a reason why UK homes have lasted over one hundred years, and most US homes won't last 50. It is a consumer culture applied to homes. They're designed to be replaced completely.

Re: Tesla’s new Solar Roof costs less than a new roof plus solar panels

#36

Post by hokkos » Sat, Oct 26, 2019, 1:24 PM UTC

rjkennedy98 wrote: post #25

> It also lists $33,950 as the price after an $8,550 federal tax incentive. There is something absolutely astonishing about the fact that in America the way we have go about being eco-friendly is to give huge tax breaks to rich people to buy solar panels and electric vehicles. To think with all that money we could build better infrastructure and denser housing. Really boggles the mind.

Incentiving rich people to buy expansive tech (and still at lost for the riches) help the technologies to ride the cost curve and bring it to the masses.

Re: Tesla’s new Solar Roof costs less than a new roof plus solar panels

#37

Post by shawnz » Sat, Oct 26, 2019, 1:25 PM UTC

rjkennedy98 wrote: post #25

> It also lists $33,950 as the price after an $8,550 federal tax incentive. There is something absolutely astonishing about the fact that in America the way we have go about being eco-friendly is to give huge tax breaks to rich people to buy solar panels and electric vehicles. To think with all that money we could build better infrastructure and denser housing. Really boggles the mind.

Is $8000 huge? What kind of infrastructure do you expect to build with that?

Re: Tesla’s new Solar Roof costs less than a new roof plus solar panels

#38

Post by Someone1234 » Sat, Oct 26, 2019, 1:25 PM UTC

deelowe wrote: post #27

bArray wrote: post #22

I think a major challenge that is yet to be addressed is the fact that solar panels lose their efficiency over time [1] [2]. Seems like you're looking at 80% of rated efficiency after 20 years - and I'm unsure this includes failures. In the UK a 50+ year old roof is very common - most people expect a house to outlast them without anything but minor repairs. If I were building a house I would want something where it's…

In the US roofs last more like 25 to 30 years for shingles.

We had to replace ours after only 15 years (and we should have done so earlier). The manufacturer's claims are suspect. Expansion/contraction due to the hot/cold cycle caused ours to crack (literally apart in some cases).

Re: Tesla’s new Solar Roof costs less than a new roof plus solar panels

#39

Post by annoyingnoob » Sat, Oct 26, 2019, 1:26 PM UTC

nraynaud wrote: post #30

rjkennedy98 wrote: post #25

> It also lists $33,950 as the price after an $8,550 federal tax incentive. There is something absolutely astonishing about the fact that in America the way we have go about being eco-friendly is to give huge tax breaks to rich people to buy solar panels and electric vehicles. To think with all that money we could build better infrastructure and denser housing. Really boggles the mind.

Americans on average do not want denser housing. It's not part of their culture, they don't see the point, they want a backyard, and they don't mind having to drive all the time. I'm pretty sure that even the people benefitting for the wealth cities produce would prefer not to live there, and I think the development of rich people's houses along the CT coast attest to that, they try to balance the wealth of the city…

I think you are right that a lot of Americans do not want dense housing. One thing we are missing, especially on the west coast, is good public transportation. Its not that I don't mind driving as much as that I don't have a choice. I'd love to take a train/subway to work or to the next town over or to the big city nearby - but those trains do not exist.

Re: Tesla’s new Solar Roof costs less than a new roof plus solar panels

#40

Post by paganel » Sat, Oct 26, 2019, 1:26 PM UTC

rjkennedy98 wrote: post #25

> It also lists $33,950 as the price after an $8,550 federal tax incentive. There is something absolutely astonishing about the fact that in America the way we have go about being eco-friendly is to give huge tax breaks to rich people to buy solar panels and electric vehicles. To think with all that money we could build better infrastructure and denser housing. Really boggles the mind.

The same thing happens in Europe, most of the eco-related additional costs are actually regressive taxes that will mostly fall on the less better off. There are not that many media outlets openly discussing this, and the few people who actually do talk about it are painted as “wanting to destroy the planet” or worse.