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

Solar panels reduced my electric bill in 2022

mattbruenig.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

241–250 of 510 posts

Re: Solar panels reduced my electric bill in 2022

#241

Post by akira2501 »

prettychill wrote: post #5

I am surprised at these power bills, at least in my area the implied "savings" are 2-3 times what my bill is on any given month. Huge house maybe?

I don't find his methods particularly rigorous. He's just taking total generated kWh and multiplying it by current utility rates and then saying this represents savings.

Does it, though? We don't know how much of the generated power was actually used instead of sold back into the grid, or if this is even a grid tied installation, and what the return sales rate would be.

The only way to actually compare this is to look at the actual bills. What did you pay last year, what did you pay this year? That's _actual_ savings. This is calculated plausible savings. It's not at all clear they're the same thing in this scenario.

Finally.. if you're in a position to even say you're _saving_ $233/mo, then how inefficient is your home in the first place? How many people live there to generate this large of a bill? How much of a difference would it have made to make that house more thermally or electrically efficient instead?

Re: Solar panels reduced my electric bill in 2022

#242

Post by [deleted] »

praxulus wrote: post #144
hbarka wrote: post #109

Assuming you are grid-tied, the reduction of electric bills is predicated on net metering, where the utility company gives you (ideally) 1-for-1 credit for the electricity you produce. In California, this was called NEM 1.0 and NEM 2.0. Every few years the California utilities lobby the Public Utilities Commission (PUC) to chip away at the NEM program. This year the PUC voted unanimously to cut net energy metering an…

Net metering just doesn't make sense though. Everyone who wants to rely on the grid for power availability ought to pay for grid upkeep costs. Net metering would make sense if it came on top of a baseline "connectivity fee" that covered grid maintenance, but that's not the current policy, would likely be politically infeasible, and would hurt rooftop solar customers financially anyway. Subsidizing solar is a perfectl…

[deleted]

Re: Solar panels reduced my electric bill in 2022

#244

Post by EricE »

acomjean wrote: post #93
dashundchen wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

All it takes is a little snow to melt or blow off and the exposed panel will heat and cause the rest of the snow to melt and slide off. The panels are relatively slippery so a little melt at a pitch will clear them in no time.

my partner has panels on her house around boston. They work well. The snow slides off, usually with a great "wump" as it drops 2 stories into the yard. Its acually a little startling at first. They work better in the summer, but provide most of the house power. Doesn't help much with the EV she got since except in the summer. She got a electric water heater as well.

If her water heater is in the basement, when it comes time to replace look at the heat pump water heaters. As a bonus, they dehumidify as they work - which is usually a very good thing for basements!

Re: Solar panels reduced my electric bill in 2022

#245

Post by bena »

claytongulick wrote: post #146
malfist wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Perhaps instead of being angry that people are using taxes that come from the working class, instead you should ask why the wealthy aren't paying their share of the taxes? And nobody pays for anything with inflation. That's not how inflation works.

"The top 1 percent paid a greater share of individual income taxes (38.8 percent) than the bottom 90 percent combined (29.2 percent)."[1] How is that not paying their share? [1] https://taxfoundation.org/publications/latest-federal-income...

You're missing some "of"s.

It's the "top 1 percent of taxpayers". So the people who paid the most taxes, paid the most taxes. They also made 20% of the total income. Or roughly 2 trillion dollars.

So if you managed to make a lot of money but also managed to avoid paying taxes on that money, you would not be included in "the top 1 percent of taxpayers".

The bottom 50% of taxpayers only made 11.1% of the income.

And that's the problem with all of this, there are ways to slice the data to try and gloss over the very real problem of wealth inequality we have right now.

Re: Solar panels reduced my electric bill in 2022

#246

Post by bgentry »

manscrober wrote: post #191
bgentry wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm in the Austin suburbs on Pedernales Electric Coop (not Austin Energy as in the city proper). In 2022 they switched away from net metering to a scheme that pays just over 50% of the cost for power returned to the grid. So I now pay $0.090337/kWh for power consumed from the grid, and am credited only $0.05377/kWh for power returned to the grid. https://www.pec.coop/your-service/distributed-generation/int... This ha…

My parents in Germany are paying 0.50€/kWh this year. How much does a typical household use in austin?

Looks like the household average is ~1000 kWh/month, with summer months being a lot higher.

https://austinenergy.com/about/reports-and-data-library/data...

Re: Solar panels reduced my electric bill in 2022

#247

Post by jrochkind1 »

ihaveajob wrote: post #217
mrguyorama wrote: post #179

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In maine, CMP charges $11 a month for a "connection" to the grid and your first monthly 50kwh. Is that not the case in california or other net metering markets?

Yes it is, there's a connection fee of approximately $10/month for that same reason. Net metering is a totally unrelated topic. What's being argued about is the rate. Until now, rooftop solar customers get a retail-level payback for excess production sent to the grid. Under the proposal, this payback would be at the wholesale price, which is significantly lower.

You can still totally offset your own actual consumption at retail rate, but any negative over your actual consumption for the month, you only get paid cash at wholesale rate?

Without knowing anything about this or any context... that does not seem unreasonable to me.

Note that OP didn't even require net negative at all to have it still totally be a great investment. He only offest a portion of his actual usage. So net negative paid only at wholesale rate seems like it should still be functional economically and leave plenty of incentive. Wouldn't have effected OP at all, for those who do go net negative and it effects, it seems like it shouldn't tip the scales.

Re: Solar panels reduced my electric bill in 2022

#248

Post by [deleted] »

eppp wrote: post #187
londons_explore wrote: post #172

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Another option is to split the fee into a 'connection fee', 'transmission fee' and a 'power fee'. Have the power fee set realtime by a market. The price might go to zero if there is excess generation. Have the transmission fee capped by a regulator - and charge it for any kilowatt hours that enter the power network. Allow third parties to arbitrage and offer 'fixed rate' deals, so consumers aren't at the whims of an…

Congratulations you invented Enron.

[deleted]

Re: Solar panels reduced my electric bill in 2022

#249

Post by pokeymcsnatch »

kibwen wrote: post #231
pokeymcsnatch wrote: post #203

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Afaik shingle roofs (common in US) need replacing every 10-20 years.

I actually wonder how solar panels reduce the rate at which a roof deteriorates. The panels themselves should bear the brunt of the light and rain that the shingles below them would otherwise endure, but on the other hand the panels don't cover the entire roof, so maybe at best you'd need to replace less of the roof but on the same schedule.

Yeah, that makes sense to me. I don't know the specifics of shingle deterioration, but just having them physically shielded from light and precipitation has got to drastically improve their lifespan. That's a good point about only part of the roof being protected though.

Re: Solar panels reduced my electric bill in 2022

#250

Post by EVa5I7bHFq9mnYK »

dml2135 wrote: post #163
maerF0x0 wrote: post #87

>Realizing that the solar company was in quite the pickle insofar as repossessing the panels would require costly legal actions on top of paying people to take out the system, I just waited on the payment. They would contact me periodically asking me to make payment and offering to help me get approved for a new loan. But I just ignored all of that. Seems pretty unethical tbh. The solar company delivered, but now thi…

From my read, the solar company delivered late, causing the original loan to fall through and requiring the homeowner to refinance at a higher rate. Since that delay cost money it does seem fair that the company should bear the cost.

Going from, say, 3% to 4% on a $20k 10-year loan would cost him about $1100. He squeezed them for $5k.
Post reply on HN