111–120 of 166 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yeah more dependency on china! Nothing to backfire, no Chinese influence at all!
Unlike the oil dependency system, where there's actual scarcity of the thing you need (oil), there's nothing special about building solar panels that locks you to China. Basically any country could build it, but they need to figure out how to build stuff in general (as opposed to outsourcing like the last three decades)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not sure what the actual cost was, but in 2015 my parents got a solar system in California that covers the entire house plus an EV. I remember looking at the time to payoff and I think it took maybe five years, now day to day power and all their driving is essentially free.
What about without subsidies?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>Why do you need to assume 100% generation For the time to payback to be even remotely close to 5 years in that scenario. Otherwise you're easily talking a decade plus.
I don't get it... system costs scale pretty closely with number of panels. If a $X system covers 100% of your use, a $X/2 system probably covers 50% of your use. Ignoring time value of money, if the $X system saves you $X / 5 per year, the $X / 2 system that generates 50% will save you $X / 10 per year. Both systems would have a 5 year ROI. Even if your half price system generates only 45%, it only brings the ROI out…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't get it... system costs scale pretty closely with number of panels. If a $X system covers 100% of your use, a $X/2 system probably covers 50% of your use. Ignoring time value of money, if the $X system saves you $X / 5 per year, the $X / 2 system that generates 50% will save you $X / 10 per year. Both systems would have a 5 year ROI. Even if your half price system generates only 45%, it only brings the ROI out…
Identical solar panels in San Diego produce more KWh than they do in Boston. Same cost, quicker payoff.
But regardless of where you install, if a system with 100% generation has a 5 year ROI, a smaller system should have a similar ROI, because the system cost mostly scales with the system size. Probably not down to a single panel (although the plug and play systems available in some jurisdictions do work for low scale)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This perspective is always so myopic to me. I say this as someone who doesn't make much money who's in the middle of a massive solar install (DIY). I made some simulations and a spreadsheet to work out all of the scenarios and I figured out that with a loan I can come out at monthly financing costs nearly exactly my electrical bill every month. That's right, I can have a 12 kWh battery backed 18 kW whole-home install…
>"Saying there's no "ROI" is looking at the situation like the only variable is your monthly expenses." That's the reality of life for most people outside of our little bubble of six figure earners. If it's a higher monthly price, it's a nonstarter. >"Additional home value/equity" I wouldn't be so sure of that. Solar is a massive maintenance liability that a majority of buyers will avoid. Fine if you find the right o…
That's not at all true where I live (Seattle): the cost of a solar system goes almost straight over into home equity. Solar energy is a feature - a real selling point. No idea what maintenance liability you could have in mind; one can have panels cleaned once a year, for maximum output, but they still just work if you don't. Other than that there is literally nothing to maintain.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is not true. Batteries are cheaper than peaker power plants using fossil fuel. They also allow the operator to fulfill market demands at the minute level versus the hours previously that it took to turn on a peaker plant. This is being done at scale in California and Texas.
Fore more than 2 hours capacity, batteries are expensive than most other and cost keeps increasing as more hours of capacity needed. Without gas or coal to burn when 1hr battery capacity runs out, battery storage is expensive.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The total cost of the French nuclear program since the beginning was estimated at 228 billion euros at 2012 prices, including both research and construction costs. By that time Germany cumulatively poured around a trilling euros into the green energy and still had coal power plants and 2x the CO2 per capita compared to France. As of 2026, in Germany 22.5% of electricity still comes from coal and CO2 per capita is sti…
Using German coal dependence as a baseline statistic to prove that nuclear is more economical than green energy is a remarkable stunt.
Germany wasted enormous amounts of money on green energy and made very little progress.
Which country is more "green"? Which technology is more "green"?
My solar panels amaze me every day. It is just crazy that a flat panel, that doesn't have any moving parts, and requires a once a year cleaning (at most), just eliminated my power bill completely.
Doesn't make the solar panel(s) any less great to have though.
The title is misleading. $135 is not "money saved", it's "money not spent on fossil fuels" (even for that I couldn't find how it was calculated by solarpowereurope, but the number seems plausible). To the discussion of whether $50B/y is a big figure or not. EU has around 400GW of PV installed. Cost to install per 1kW ranged between $600 and up to $4000 because a big chunk of that capacity was built when prices were m…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This perspective is always so myopic to me. I say this as someone who doesn't make much money who's in the middle of a massive solar install (DIY). I made some simulations and a spreadsheet to work out all of the scenarios and I figured out that with a loan I can come out at monthly financing costs nearly exactly my electrical bill every month. That's right, I can have a 12 kWh battery backed 18 kW whole-home install…
>"Saying there's no "ROI" is looking at the situation like the only variable is your monthly expenses." That's the reality of life for most people outside of our little bubble of six figure earners. If it's a higher monthly price, it's a nonstarter. >"Additional home value/equity" I wouldn't be so sure of that. Solar is a massive maintenance liability that a majority of buyers will avoid. Fine if you find the right o…
Can you cite sources please.
I’ve had my system in Canada for 2.5 years, flawless, not one second of maintenance.
Family in Australia have had systems for over 10 years with zero maintenance
Also electricity here is ore approved to increase by a minimum of 5% a year, so a solar install on a house is huge for equity. Most people here spend around $2k to $3k a year on heat. I spend $400.