What are some payback times for systems currently installed?

[Pete S]

I put up a tiny test setup a couple of years ago and concluded that, for me,
in west central Wisconsin, I'd be dead before a system would break even.
That's for systems where the user is currently connected to the grid.
If one is off-grid, it's a different story.

You can see what I did if you havent' seen it before at:
http://www.spaco.org/PV/PVSolar.htm

I know it was a cheap system, but give me credit for being able to
extrapolate my results to those of higher output, but more costly systems.

So, what are people who ARE on the grid and using significant solar systems
actually finding?
First the number for subsidized systems that I helped pay for through taxes
and then for non-subsidized installations.
I have heard numbers like 25 years, and even worse for wind electric
systems where I live, and several years less for those who got the big
subsidies.

Pete Stanaitis
---------------

[Mho]

In Ontario, Canada they have introduced a subsidized rate of 80.3 cents/kWh
and it can be profitable.

Most people I have talked to with experience seem to agree it would take
about 40 cents/kWh to break even...ever.

At most rates, about 11 cents/kWh, you will not likely ever break even on
just the interest or LOI of the money spent.

Almost all people with experience agree that with current battery technology
and battery system usage you will never generate energy worth the
maintenance costs of the battery system.

OTOH: on the first point, based on a no battery system, PV panels have
dropped from $6/Watt down to $2-3/Watt and may hit $1/Watt next year, as the
market is disappearing for them. People have learned they will never profit
in money and cause more eco-damage manufacturing them than they will ever
save.


--------------------
"Pete S" wrote in message
news:gLudncgLRYCD9CnT...@bright.net...

[stevey]

Hi Peter,

Thanks for sharing your experiment with us.
First of all, the Harbor Freight modules appear to be hobbyst quality,
not commercial
grade modules. Nor is your Balance-of-System typical of commercial
installations.
Thus is is not fair to declare a general conclusion about a category
product and
practice.
Your experiment is rather interesting in that it reveals electrical
characteristics
where different subsystems are introduced. Please keep us up with
updates
on your system.
I am quite curious about actual long-term performance of most solar
power sites.
In general, I can say from first hand observations, most systems are
delivering 65% to 95%
of 'promised' performance, if these are professionally designed,
constructed and maintained.
My data sources are mostly spotty and non-rigorous. Thus I'd be
interested in large scale,
collection of performance data, which is not readily available.
-Steve
-

[argusy]

I've had a 1.5Kw solar array for over a year, (Adelaide, South Australia), but
with a 3Kw inverter. The feed-in tariff is 50c, and the system has reduced my
power bill by about 25% (comparing last year's bills with this year's). The Feds
have (sorry, had) a rebate scheme that took off several thousand dollars
as well

We get a lot of sunshine here

IT cost me $2200, and if I toss in the cost of a "Cost Current" brand monitor
with two extra sensors (I have three phase power), I should get a return on my
investment in about 5 to six years. I'm just wondering if you've got the
expected life expectancy of solar arrays (25-30 years) mixed up with ROI.

Considering I was paying 23c/Kwh last year, now up to 29c/KwH, and is going up
to 34c/Kwh early next year (with who knows how many rises after that), I
consider I made the correct decision to install, and my effective ROI may be
sooner than I originally thought, based on my electricity utility's spiralling
rises in cost

I'm seriously considering spending some of my retirement money next year (I'm
64) and adding the extra panels to increase my output to 3Kw. (yeah - I know the
difference between 3Kw and 3 Kw/hour)

Like you, I like to know how, what and why, and because I'm just as much into
electronics as you are (I've been in electronics over 40 years), I wrote my own
program for the CC monitor, to track the three phases into my house. (two are
power in, and the third is dedicated to solar generation). I even built a
twilight sensor to cut the supply power, because when the inverter was "off", it
was drawing about 125w per hour!!

I've now got a mountain of info stored in an access database, and my program can
present graphs showing the data hourly, daily, weekly, monthly and yearly.
I threw out the .CSV data the monitor generates, as within a week, neither
notepad, wordpad, word or excel could take it in.

Well, it could, but I'd have to add some serious data stripping in my program to
chop up and store the CSV file as it comes through the comms port. As it is,
every six seconds it sends model, version, three phase info, date, time,
temperature, nine other (unused) AIM sensors and every two hours a big bunch of
historical info. Most of which is not needed when just the three phase info is
stripped out and stored in an .mdb file.

With that sort of info presented in the graphs, I tracked down just where I was
using power in the house and did some cost cutting (CFLs throughout, 1 watt LEDs
in the toilets, just how much power was used leaving the TV in standby ......
that sort of thing)

So, between the solar system, and purchasing a decent monitor, I've probably
answered your question about payback times. With changes in attitude on power
usage, installing just a 1500W system here in Adelaide, a ROI could be down to
about six-seven years.

Maybe less if the PV systems keep dropping in price, and they have - now I could
buy my system for about $1700-1800, but the bastards in the government dropped
the FIT for new installations. (I'm OK - I'm locked in at 50c for the next 17
years!)

AND - electricity costs keep going up!!

I'm sorry, Pete, but I don't think a 45 Watt system, even connected to an
electricity utility would ever give you any idea as to what payback times are in
play. For all the effort you've put into it, and I give you a lot of kudos for
doing it (I took a look at your site), I think you've gone the wrong way to
estimate a return-of-investment on solar arrays.

er.. also sorry - you didn't pay any taxes on my system here in OZ!!

Graham AKA Argusy

[Mho]

You must have some very cheap panels available there!

It would seem, as in the past, without subsidies, the system would still not
likely, ever "break even"

----------
"argusy" wrote in message news:4EB7CBE1...@slmember.on.net...

[argusy]

On 08/11/11 1:44 AM, Mho wrote:
> You must have some very cheap panels available there!

No, not really - the Government gave me $6200 when they purchased the RECs off
me (something about carbon savings). Add $2200 and that's $8,400
That's eight 192W panels, a 3Kw inverter, plus labour and installation

>
> It would seem, as in the past, without subsidies, the system would still not
> likely, ever "break even"
>

<snip>.

Bullshit!!

You'd better go see you investment advisor about that statement. I'll bet you
he'd say "Crap. In any 7 year period since the first bank opened for business
two thousand years ago, ANY investment will DOUBLE in value").

Get off your butt and do some research on the internet about investments,
because that's exactly what a solar installation is.

My savings on the electricity bill would be more than double that $2,200 in
seven years time. After that, the Solar system has been paid for in the savings,
and beyond that, my electricity bill will be a damn side lower BECAUSE OF THE
ORIGINAL INVESTMENT.

IF I didn't factor in rising electricity costs or the REC payout, I would break
even about 17-20 years time on $8,400. Even at my age (64), I should still be
alive then. But life never stays stagnant. If I thought, for one moment, that
electricity prices would stay at todays' prices for 17 years (which you seem to
think) then I'd be living in Fairyland.

This is reality - prices WILL RISE - Guaranteed, fair dinkum, honest-to-God, I
kid you not.

Any reduction of that cost means it stays in my pocket, not the supplier's. And
remember, that savings increases every time the cost goes up.

It's not the initial capital expenditure, but the FUTURE INVESTMENT that pays
off (in this case, the savings I make in that period of time).

[Mho]

Yup you have some pretty rich subsidies there. Without them solar PV is no
investment unless you like negative gains.

You refer to a Kw/hour. I assume you mean kWh?

What is your insolation factor there?

Your double your investment value in 7 years hasn't applied in N.America
since about 1980 and it never has at 7% ROI. That would be more like 10.3
years. Your math seems to be out of date.

I agree with your 17-20 years without maintenance and no removal of the rate
subsidy or rise in cost to you per kWh. You need to include the reduction in
interest as you would pay the investment interest off (amortize the loan)
making the time even less.

You have done quite well with the subsidies being given to you. Most are not
that lucky. We have been handed 80.3 cents /kWh and no capitol subsidies.
That definitely makes our PV industry work. The subsidies will not last
forever, though.


----------
"argusy" wrote in message news:4EB906E2...@slmember.on.net...

[argusy]

On 09/11/11 1:27 PM, Mho wrote:
> Yup you have some pretty rich subsidies there. Without them solar PV is no
> investment unless you like negative gains.

Not any more. The state government dropped the FIT down from 44 to 16 cents four
weeks ago - anticipating panel prices to drop - yeah! sure! ( a little bit, but
not that much) the other six cents is gratis from the Energy supplier (making my
FIT of 50 cents, guaranteed until 2027)

>
> You refer to a Kw/hour. I assume you mean kWh?

der, Graham

>
> What is your insolation factor there?

Varies from about 2.7 to 7.1 (centred on 34 degrees south, data from NASA
Langley Research, gathered in 2002)

>
> Your double your investment value in 7 years hasn't applied in N.America since
> about 1980 and it never has at 7% ROI. That would be more like 10.3 years. Your
> math seems to be out of date.

Er.. no.. since 2000 years ago, any investment, on average, in any country, has
doubled within any seven year period. I'll stand on that statement. You may be
right about the "good Ole USA", though, so I'll let that one dry out in the sun

>
> I agree with your 17-20 years without maintenance and no removal of the rate
> subsidy or rise in cost to you per kWh. You need to include the reduction in
> interest as you would pay the investment interest off (amortize the loan) making
> the time even less.
>

I think we're saying the same thing in reverse (:->

> You have done quite well with the subsidies being given to you. Most are not
> that lucky. We have been handed 80.3 cents /kWh and no capitol subsidies. That
> definitely makes our PV industry work. The subsidies will not last forever, though.

Yep. The Oz Federal government has decreed that any and all feed in tariffs will
cease by 2027, and subsidies have already been dropped.
These Fed controlled RECs started at $40, now they are officially at $30.
They can be traded on the "carbon" market, but it's easier to let the solar
provider "buy" them. After that, I don't know how they're traded, or how they're
used for offsetting "carbon emissions" - I got $6,200, so I'm happy

I think the energy companies had a hand in the cessation of feed in tariffs,
because they'd be doing themselves out of a lot of profit if half the country
had Solar installations in fifteen years time

Everybody here in Australia woke up yesterday with the knowledge that
Australians are now the only country in the world with a carbon tax. Luverly
Lady, our Prime Minister - she made an election promise that "there will be NO
carbon tax while her party (Labor) was in government". HAH!!

A lot of us feel it's just a rort to keep more of our own money in the Fed's
coffers, rather than whatever is a "carbon tax" and "offsetting carbon
production" and all that gibberish that I can't really follow (or believe in)

After all, one volcano in South America last year, put enough carbon in the
atmosphere to offset all (man made) carbon emission savings for the next 400
years south of the equator.

<snip>

[Mho]

Try this on your calculator.

Put in 1 plus 7% or 1.07.

Now compound it for 7 years or raise it to the 7th power (exponent). It
doesn't double. That old wives tale worked when rates were at the 12 and 13%
mark back 20 years ago. Either way if true it would make most PV investments
even worse to break even.


WTF is der, Graham? I assume he is a contributor here?

Your insolation factor should not vary. It will be a solid factor based on
one day, averaged over the period of a year.

Again, you have very good climates, excellent subsidies to make this
profitable for you. Mine will never pay off in 100 years. I use them because
I was an overzealous pioneer. Mind you I did live off them while building my
home. It would have been much cheaper to get grid power. Probably less than
10%, just in batteries alone.

------------
"argusy" wrote in message news:4EBA60F8...@slmember.on.net...

[argusy]

On 15/11/11 2:23 PM, Mho wrote:
> Try this on your calculator.
>
> Put in 1 plus 7% or 1.07.
>
> Now compound it for 7 years or raise it to the 7th power (exponent). It doesn't
> double. That old wives tale worked when rates were at the 12 and 13% mark back
> 20 years ago. Either way if true it would make most PV investments even worse to
> break even.
>
>

Now you're trying to treat me like an eight year old, just learning about
compound interest

Hey, I'm 64

I grew up WITHOUT a calculator, and I can still do compound interest in my head.
I know 1.07 ^ 7 is about 1.6 not 2.

I DIDN'T MENTION COMPOUND INTEREST.

(I could say "you moron" here, but I won't)

The AVERAGE investment, (note - nothing about compound interest), will double in
value every seven years (so where did this 7% compounded come from?), given the
data that's been garnered from records dating back to the first banks in the
Grecian Empire (so that's about 2500 years)

Oh, come on - I wrote AVERAGE!! That means there's an awful lot of investments
that MORE than double in seven years.

I'll let you in on a secret - Weapons investments well and truly are higher than
the AVERAGE investment, and which Empires grew phenomenally with wars
(err... Greek, Roman, Egyptian, Spanish, Dutch, English, American, plus a lot of
others)

Whoops, American!!. Oh, of course, USA weapon makers have been selling weapons
to protagonists for two hundred years. The USA NEEDS warring countries so the
average American can live in a style that most countries only dream about.

Go check on your American weapon makers' profits since the 1700's.



> WTF is "der, Graham"? I assume he is a contributor here?

no. That's me.

IN the USA you'd probably understand it more if you watch the Simpsons, with
Bart's dad going "Doh, stupid" (referring to himself, of course)

What is your insolation factor there?

Varies from about 2.7 to 7.1 (centred on 34 degrees south, data from NASA
Langley Research, gathered in 2002)

Your insolation factor should not vary. It will be a solid factor based on one
day, averaged over the period of a year.

It had better vary, as our planet has an axial tilt, and I get hot in summer and
cold in winter.

If I pick the summer solstice, that's 7.1
If I pick the Winter solstice, it's 2.7

Either of the equinoxes will give you the following (read: five-year-old maths
lesson)

Add 2.7 to 7.1
divide the answer by 2.

Is that your "solid factor"?


I'm not even going to bother any further - just look up "insolation factor" on
the internet.

<snip>

[Ron Rosenfeld]

I think you are absolutely correct concerning the financial viability of unsubsidized, grid-connected PV systems.

But a number of locales do have subsidies which make PV competitive with mains power (and one could get into a long and irrelevant argument about subsidization of mains power and its sources, but I digress).

For your system, you could also compare your actual output with your predicted output. The predicted output depends on "solar insolation" which is the average number of "full-sun hours" at your locale for a given time frame. For example PVWatts suggests that in the winter, you might average 3 "effective-sun-hours" per day. That means you should expect no more than (45 x 3) watts output from your setup, on average, per winter day. Many factors will derate this further, however.

I have an off-grid system, and averaging data over about six years, I draw some interesting conclusions. Comparing with PVWatts, an NREL tool for such modeling, and taking into account orientation and location, I get about 40-50% of the predicted output for my size system. However, using a more sophisticated tool (embodied in the HOMER program), the predictions for output are about 85% of my measurements. I suspect the PVWatts database does not take into account my coastal location, which has increased fog. And the HOMER numbers may be a bit low as I get significant energy from a wind turbine (so the PV array will not be generating measureable power when the batteries are full).

Again, so far as the economics, the power company wanted $40K to extend the grid to my house. My system's payback was instantaneous. Had grid extension costs been less, however, they payback would not have been there.

[stevey]

Hi Folks,

I'm glad to see you all engaged on this topic.
As an energy engineering profession, and founder of Wattminder,
investing in solar power
is a given--Sun's energy is FREE and forever. I like to introduce
PVmonitor.net, our 5-year old
PV performance benchmark on demand; and its successor PVwizard.com.
Both offer FREE
benchmark calculator service on-demand and instant display to help you
check up on your site.

In the past few months, Wattminder has been working on our second
generation,
on-demand analytics service platform for solar power sites anywhere in
the world.

It is in all-free beta trial for a month, in which we hope to gather
input
from users like yourselves so that we can modify and improve on it.
The basic benchmark service has been revamped with refinements like
aging
consideration, tracking, irridiance correction for air-mass; will
always be free.

While more advanced services added like Performance Check and
Degradation
Assessment will become fee services after the beta trial.

Please visit www.pvwizard.com , and give it honest and brutal
critique.
We won't be offended by your comment. For a brief introduction, see--
https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=explorer&chrome=true&srcid=0BxuyQoc-vUJ-MzRlNmM5ZjYtNjQ2My00YjlkLWIzOTgtOTk5YmZhOWYxZGRj&hl=en_US
Thanks and looking forward to hearing from you.
May the Sun always warm your face and your panels!

[Mho]

OK with that math and bad memory, we won't go any further.

----------
"argusy" wrote in message news:4EC24157...@slmember.on.net...

[Mho]

Great! A sales spammer.

You are one of the types that has been lying to the public for years. The
bias has been exposed by most experienced suckers that purchased, in the
past. Without subsidies PV has been a dead loss financially.

With or without financial subsidies, PV systems have been a dead loss,
ecology wise. The pollution created in manufacturing and maintaining a
system has always outweighed the pollution generated by current electrical
generation systems, creating that same energy.

Where grid energy is not available cheaply, PV is a necessity, usually.

---------
"stevey" wrote in message
news:885b41d0-af3e-441a...@p3g2000pre.googlegroups.com...

[argusy]

On 16/11/11 2:38 PM, Mho wrote:
> Great! A sales spammer.
>
> You are one of the types that has been lying to the public for years. The bias
> has been exposed by most experienced suckers that purchased, in the past.
> Without subsidies PV has been a dead loss financially.
>
> With or without financial subsidies, PV systems have been a dead loss, ecology
> wise. The pollution created in manufacturing and maintaining a system has always
> outweighed the pollution generated by current electrical generation systems,
> creating that same energy.
>
> Where grid energy is not available cheaply, PV is a necessity, usually.
>

<snip>

no point in replaying the sales pitch, Mho <grin>

Lurkers!!

Always waiting in the background, just ready to pounce.
I've written my own power/pv monitor program, using a well-known
monitor/transmitter that has been re-branded in several countries.

I couldn't find a cheap enough program that recorded three phases, and presented
enough graphs on the data I wanted, so this old noggin just had to sit down with
a book on serial comms (which I really hadn't looked at much)
and plenty of searching via google for a decent (ie cheap) chart/graph for VB6

IT took me a lot of weekends, but I've now got an old Toshiba laptop (Win 2K)
running 24/7 with my program. Now I'll just have to buy a single PV panel, a
cheap DC-DC inverter and a big enough battery to last all night just to keep it
off the solar system.

Oh well, I might as well put it on a pole with a sun-tracker, and get the most I
can out of it.

Graham

[Mho]

Man! The hours I have spent professionally and personally writing serial
port twiddling routines to poll equipment! I would be ashamed to admit it,
sometimes, well, to the management, anyway...LOL

I tried to get any protocols out of my Co-gen / inverter / charger / MPPT
unit manufacturer but they clam up. One day **SIGH** I will connect the old
RS-485 adapter up and rip off the comm protocol and write my own stuff also.
Their monitor programme sucks. VB 6 sounds great... never could get any
VB.net stuff working and haven't had the time. X-10 software I wrote needs
work and polish too then I have a few RTU units I need to make talk to
control some house stuff...drive is fading though, too many other projects.

Sounds like a parallel world over there!

Sorry about the replay. I usually snip or obliterate the stuff when whining
about something.

--------------
"argusy" wrote in message news:4EC37848...@slmember.on.net...

[argusy]

On 17/11/11 4:36 AM, Mho wrote:
> Man! The hours I have spent professionally and personally writing serial port
> twiddling routines to poll equipment! I would be ashamed to admit it, sometimes,
> well, to the management, anyway...LOL
>
> I tried to get any protocols out of my Co-gen / inverter / charger / MPPT unit
> manufacturer but they clam up. One day **SIGH** I will connect the old RS-485
> adapter up and rip off the comm protocol and write my own stuff also. Their
> monitor programme sucks. VB 6 sounds great... never could get any VB.net stuff
> working and haven't had the time. X-10 software I wrote needs work and polish
> too then I have a few RTU units I need to make talk to control some house
> stuff...drive is fading though, too many other projects.
>
> Sounds like a parallel world over there!
>
> Sorry about the replay. I usually snip or obliterate the stuff when whining
> about something.
>
<-->

LOL. The Company buys lots of equipment that communicates directly back to the
vendor, so they can analyse problems without leaving their desk (in Japan,
Germany, Italy - wherever), so I appreciate your comments on manufacturers
clamming up.

I put off buying a book on serial comms by Dick Grier for years, but when I
couldn't get anything to work properly (even with all the info I gleaned from
the 16 visual basic books I have, and the internet), I took the plunge and
bought it.

Seriously, this guy really knows serial comms and how to write programs (in VB)!

It gave me the info on what I was doing wrong.

I'd dearly love to get the HP serial analyser we have at work, even over a
weekend, so I can see just what this Sunny Roo inverter uses for protocols. Even
the older Atlantic analyser would do, but I was told not to, by the manager.

The great thing about the HP was it could communicate, trap data and replay it,
so it made my life a lot easier finding comms problems on the company equipment

sigh....

I just might steal it <grin>

Never got into X10 (know it exists as about my limit). Sounds like you've been
doing (or thinking about) what I've always been interested in - wiring up a
house with things that talk to each other (or at least controlled by a central
source).

At 64, though, my drive is heading for a drink under a brolly, on the beach,
wasting time, watching the tide roll in.....

Errr.... sounds like a song from the sixties...

[do...@94.usenet.us.com]

Mho <Impe...@ugotocd.invalid> wrote:

> Most people I have talked to with experience seem to agree it would take
> about 40 cents/kWh to break even...ever.

> At most rates, about 11 cents/kWh, you will not likely ever break even on
> just the interest or LOI of the money spent.

I had an initial rebate that lowered my install costs, but no ongoing
subsidies.

My provider, PG&E, has a tiered rate, with the top scale at $0.33276
starting 11-11-01. They declare the "average" rate to be $0.18299

I don't know how the "most people" that you described above came to the
$0.40 number, but I accept that some such number does exist.

To optimize my investment in solar panels, the plan would be to eliminate
that "tier 5" usage, at .33, and if my trigger point were $0.29, I might do
well to get down to below the tier 3 point, 200% of the allowed baseline,
12.7kWh per day. Whatever I consume over 25kWh per day, I would like to
trim off. I consumed 35kWh/day in 2009, the last year I made calculations.
My PV generated 18kWh/day in 2009, so I overshot the high-efficiency point.
I spent too much on my system to gain maximum return. My PG&E bill is
always in tier 1, so I have eliminated all of tier 2-3-4-5.

Tier 1 Tier 2 Tier 3 Tier 4 Tier 5
.12233 .13907 .30180 .34180 .34180

Some of my production is only being returned at .12233, probably a loss to
me, some production is at better rates.

I have A/C that I run in the summertime. Some folks don't have that. I
have tiered rates in my area, and the A/C causes high charges in the
summertime, even with the solar.

It is wrong for someone in northern Wisconsin to declare solar power
unproductive for everyone because of his environment, ignoring others. In
the TVA, when I looked last, the rate was $0.04, not a market for solar.

It isn't beneficial for everyone, but it is for me.
http://cdold.home.mchsi.com/Solar-generation.htm $1,897 avoided in 2009
A 20 year loan to buy my system would be $121 per month, and the interest
would be deductible. I think that's a profit from the start.

--
Clarence A Dold - Hidden Valley Lake, CA, USA GPS: 38.8,-122.5

[Mho]

Yes, things have changed with subsidies, TOU & multitier rates and cheaper
panels, for sure. It would appear you have some profit left from your 20
year amortization with your higher rates.

Most consumers were in the 0.10 / kWh zone the last few years, no subsidies
(most still don't) and $6-10 /Watt panels. Those systems will never pay or
break even. With PV panels coming down in price the $0.40 is a little rich
and it was just a quick estimate with experienced people, online a few years
back. It would seem, even with your system anything under the $0.20 - $0.30
/ kWh rate would be more appropriate.

Then arrives the Insurance company scenario in the last year. After watching
FireFighters refuse to pour water on fires with PV panels on the roof the
insurance companies are starting to take notice and things are in the works.
In Ontario we don't get $0.803 unless they are on your roof and not
consuming real estate space. Round two just around the corner on that one.
Who knows?

I still classify it as a cool hobby for most. If you don't understand the
difference between power and energy, stand back and watch somebody else play
with it. A guy up the street has over 200kW on his roof and they are covered
in snow between Dec and May each winter. One has to wonder what his payback
is like....LOL


-----------------
wrote in message news:ja691a$2ah$1...@blue-new.rahul.net...

[argusy]

On 21/11/11 7:11 AM, Mho wrote:
> Yes, things have changed with subsidies, TOU & multitier rates and cheaper
> panels, for sure. It would appear you have some profit left from your 20 year
> amortization with your higher rates.
>
> Most consumers were in the 0.10 / kWh zone the last few years, no subsidies
> (most still don't) and $6-10 /Watt panels. Those systems will never pay or break
> even. With PV panels coming down in price the $0.40 is a little rich and it was
> just a quick estimate with experienced people, online a few years back. It would
> seem, even with your system anything under the $0.20 - $0.30 / kWh rate would be
> more appropriate.
>
> Then arrives the Insurance company scenario in the last year. After watching
> FireFighters refuse to pour water on fires with PV panels on the roof the
> insurance companies are starting to take notice and things are in the works. In
> Ontario we don't get $0.803 unless they are on your roof and not consuming real
> estate space. Round two just around the corner on that one. Who knows?
>
> I still classify it as a cool hobby for most. If you don't understand the
> difference between power and energy, stand back and watch somebody else play
> with it. A guy up the street has over 200kW on his roof and they are covered in
> snow between Dec and May each winter. One has to wonder what his payback is
> like....LOL

Even I can appreciate the humour about your neighbour - my sunny country has
cool winters, and only in one small corner do we get snow - we're lucky if it
lasts longer than 6-8 weeks.

I never thought about having a fire - that's a good point about firefighters
A stream of water with 360 volts or more on it, and a capacity to throw a few
amps through a fireman wouldn't make them too happy. So let it burn. Oh, I can
see insurance companies not paying out because you didn't inform them about a PV
installation.
With a "let it burn" policy by firefighters, you could easily end up without a
house, an no chance of getting it replaced by insurance

Whoops!! I think I'll check my policy, and have a little chat with my insurer

Graham

[Dino]

On Sun, 20 Nov 2011 15:41:43 -0500, "Mho"
<Impe...@UgotOCD.invalid> wrote:

>
>Then arrives the Insurance company scenario in the last year. After watching
>FireFighters refuse to pour water on fires with PV panels on the roof the
>insurance companies are starting to take notice and things are in the works.

This looks stupid, with PV grid connected it is sufficient
to open the main breaker and isolate the PV system from the
grid system. Furthermore a correctly designed PV system
shall include a DC breaker with fuses to isolate the panels
from DC//AC converter.
The firefighters could then operate without any risk.
Dino

[Mho]

I doubt you will get up on the roof and cover up the live panels so they
are safe for the Firefighter's water hoses?
Even if you cut the leads off the PV panels, it wouldn't matter.

Think again. You missed the point.


-------------
"Dino" wrote in message news:ujukc7dk4k12oe614...@4ax.com...

[do...@94.usenet.us.com]

Mho <Impe...@ugotocd.invalid> wrote:
> I still classify it as a cool hobby for most. If you don't understand the
> difference between power and energy, stand back and watch somebody else

If that is a reference to my typographical slip, it puts me in a category
equal to many of PG&E's own pages, where the terms are used
interchangelbly, although I do appreciate the distinction in discussions
between the pedantic experts who have no problem making
back-of-the-envelope calculations with 10% margins of error in the same
conversation.

> with it. A guy up the street has over 200kW on his roof and they are covered
> in snow between Dec and May each winter. One has to wonder what his payback
> is like....LOL

I think it was the vernerable Nike Pine that offered that the best panel
orientation in snow country was vertical. No snow on the panel, and picked
up more reflected energy in wintertime than was lost due to orientation in
summertime.

[Mho]

It was not a reference to you but rather the masses that want to jump in
feet first without any background. It is not a hobby for them but a chore
and usually a dead loss. But, as I stated it is getting better with so many
factors changing. The sales people are getting rich from it.

-----------
wrote in message news:jaeang$mam$1...@blue-new.rahul.net...

[argusy]

You've left out a bit, Dino.

I agree about disconnecting the inverter, and disconnecting the mains from the
inverter. (That's my system btw)

That still leaves, say, eight panels wired up and if one end gets grounded by a
bare burnt cable - there's the other end, still connected, and possibly bare
wire if that fire has done a good job on the insulation, through 8 or more
panels on a sunny day and a raging fire underneath.

That could conceivably be a source of a voltage/current sufficient to kill a
fireman, acting as a conduit back to ground through a stream of water

I know that that scenario is highly improbable, but if I was a fireman, I'd
certainly not take that risk!!

Also, if I've got a fire in my house, there's no way I'd go where there's a
bloody big rising heat source, to separate all those panels.

Let it burn. I just hope my insurance has been changed to consider that, on the
day I have a fire in the house.

Graham

[Dino]

I understand your comments, and agree about the theoretical
possibility that this might happens.
Considering double contingency and failure mode of each
component of a PV system, as you state, it is highly
improbable, as the failure mode of several appliance,
machines, cars, etc.

A risk analysis might rise attention for a modified design
to include house fire risk and how to mitigate the risk.

The decision to where spend money, insurance or improved
design is your choice.
Dino

[Mho]

The results will likely be accessible switching and better training for
firefighters. The game has only started.

Maybe we will be getting solidstate switchable PV panels?? Remove some 24 v
control logic signal and all the silicon PV shuts itself off...LOL

"Watch this! I'm hacking the control signal for the neighbour's solar
panels. He'll get up on Halloween morning finding his batteries dead...LOL"

------------------
"argusy" wrote in message news:4ECB7F9B...@slmember.on.net...

[do...@94.usenet.us.com]

Mho <Impe...@ugotocd.invalid> wrote:
> It was not a reference to you but rather the masses that want to jump in
> feet first without any background. It is not a hobby for them but a
> chore and usually a dead loss. But, as I stated it is getting better
> with so many factors changing. The sales people are getting rich from it.

Someone commented here that PV installations would make sense when you
could walk into your local home improvement store, and buy a system to self
install. That has nearly happened. They are available at Home Depot, and
there are "zero down payment" installations. They are still installed
professionally, but they are more likely to be a financial positive than an
experimental cash drain.

I spoke to some people in theory about the zero-down leaseback, before it
suddenly became mainstream. One scenario was that you would install and
lease back a lot of panels on a lot of people's property, putting you above
the 10KW point where you become a common generator to PG&E.

Some theorized that the sale of energy alone would be profitable, but at
the same time, you charge each of these landholders under your panels for
their energy usage, gracefully at "last year's rates" for 20 years.

http://realgoodssolar.com/solar-financing/powersavings-plan/ has one such
offer, only available in CA and CO, so it must be leaning on subsidies and
incentives. "Lock in your electricity rate for the next 20 years"

http://www.spgsolar.com was my installer. They offered financing that was
equal to your previous year's utility bills. They now offer
http://www.spgsolar.com/products/floatovoltaics/ floating solar panels,
pitched to the wineries in the Sonoma/Napa area that have water ponds that
could benefit from shading.

Milpitas Unified School district covered their parking lots with panels,
providing shade and energy.
https://www.musd.org/cms/page_view?d=x&piid=&vpid=1217983977356
A google map. search for "high school", 95035

<http://maps.google.com/maps?q=1331+East+Calaveras+Blvd,+Milpitas,+Ca+95035+&hl=en&ll=37.435843,-121.883441&spn=0.001807,0.00327&sll=37.435893,-121.883433&hnear=1331+E+Calaveras+Blvd,+Milpitas,+Santa+Clara,+California+95035&t=h&z=19&vpsrc=0>

[Mho]

I have heard of some "lease your space" type PV installer plans here. I
don't know much about them, yet.

We have a subsidized rate of 80.2 cents/kWh under a 20 year guaranteed plan
from our Provincial government but only if they are on your rooftop and not
occupying real estate. The rate is somewhat less for ground panels and
slightly less for over 10kW. I went for the old plan where I get the going
rate only. (8-12 cents/kWh). To purchase all new equipment and pipe in the
electrics and approvals etc..etc.. would never pay me. Wife can't understand
$15K in panels not making retirement funds. I prefer to have the battery
backup system that would have to be removed and the co-gen that would have
to be trashed.

I doubt they would give you anything, here, for disturbing the eco system
of a water body...LOL The panels should stay cool and more efficient though.

Many of our Big Box stores sell PV installations but any of the
do-it-yourself panels come in about $10/W or more. That would never pay at
any payback we will see in our lifetimes.

Under the Lake Erie area there are hundreds of tracking installations with
20-30 or more panels with the wires hanging down, never to be connected.
Some salesman jumped the gun and promised grid payback..yada..yad..yada and
the grid company doesn't want them connected there. The amount of concrete
used to support such a huge beast would never pay to remove it and they sit
waiting to be approved over the next 100 years. I wonder who footed the bill
for that waste.

I really could use a tracker here as I get 260 degree sun on my mountain in
the summer time but I get such high winds they would be landing on
somebody's roof down the road, I fear. I was glad to get my wind turbine
down when it was in the way of my home foundation build and when I get it
back up it will have better quality safety items installed. The thing scared
the crap out of me the first winter and I was glad to see it down for a
re-think. Should be fun to see it go back up with my own controller circuit
instead of the garbage circuit supplied and went up in smoke...LOL All next
life projects.

----------------------

wrote in message news:jags5s$nj9$1...@blue-new.rahul.net...

[do...@94.usenet.us.com]

Mho <Impe...@ugotocd.invalid> wrote:
> I doubt they would give you anything, here, for disturbing the eco system
> of a water body...LOL The panels should stay cool and more efficient though.

The floaters are going on man made water storage ponds used for watering
the vineyards. Some of these ponds are huge, and stopovers for migrating
waterfowl, but most are probably 5 acres or less in surface area, and the
floating panels probably don't cover an acre. I don't really know.

> Under the Lake Erie area there are hundreds of tracking installations with
> 20-30 or more panels with the wires hanging down, never to be connected.

California has some reports on line about PV installed, by zip code and
installer, with details about manufacturer and such. They also have
reports on random audits, where a surprising number of installations that
have been paid rebates outright don't exist, or have disconnected wires, or
defective inverters, etc.

[Mho]

Yeah, X10 was a lot of fun until the wireless stuff goes haywire and sends
out codes without provocation. I have no analysers but know that X10 codes
are fairly secure with some checks so it must be some intelligent device
making the remotes understand. Put in filters so I could stop blaming
neighbours etc...

Now I moved and running a co-gen that interferes with most X10
communications. There is better stuff out there now but it means tossing
massive amounts of equipment and starting over. I had a lot of fun.

One algorithm I used was an "at home" simulator. With the better part of a
dozen motion detectors I sensed if no motion was had during the day at key
points and simulated somebody walking through the house looking out the
front door (porch light on then off) then back to the back door and
repeating until back up to the bedroom and all lights went out again. One
vacation we got back and apparently some neighbours that knew we were away
had called the cops after a street meeting with a few more neighbours to
discuss why we weren't answering the door. Strange as these were the "wave
to" and say "hi" once a year type neighbours...LOL I never heard anything
about it from the cops as the neighbours reported would happen.

It cycled my furnace fan depending on occupancy and time of day etc.. Most
of it was just night time motion lamps and a quicker CPU based lamp turnoff
followed by the motion timer OFF, just in case. The X-10 stuff was just not
reliable enough.

The guy that wrote the software and sold the gadgets, years ago, told me he
detected motion on his front lawn and if the doorbell didn't ring within two
minutes he turned the lawn sprinklers on...LOL

Now I would like to get into light sequencing for Christmas lights etc.. and
I understand the better software will co-ordinate with X10 devices too. $$$
SIGH $$$

-------------
"argusy" wrote in message news:4EC587E2...@slmember.on.net...

[Swims with Dolphins]

Actually, for some strange reason its called the "rule of 72", although
I think its actually 69.something.

In any case, 7.2% for 10 years, or 10% for 7.2 years, or 1% for 72
years, or 5% for 14.4 years will in fact double your money. Clearly its
a function of both time and interest.

Suspect the 7.2 number came about due to quarterly compounding instead
of instant, which the log functions assume.

[Melodie]

Le 16/11/11 05:08, Mho a écrit :

> Great! A sales spammer.
>
> You are one of the types that has been lying to the public for years.
> The bias has been exposed by most experienced suckers that purchased, in
> the past. Without subsidies PV has been a dead loss financially.
>

...
Actually, it really depends on how much you are paying for other sources
of electricity. As other sources get more expensive, PV gets more
attractive.

> With or without financial subsidies, PV systems have been a dead loss,
> ecology wise. The pollution created in manufacturing and maintaining a
> system has always outweighed the pollution generated by current
> electrical generation systems, creating that same energy.

I don't know how you can seriously claim that, given the amount of
studies that have been undertaken in the last 15 years....

Energy payback time is generally under 3 years, but goes as low as under
1 year if you are in a particularily high insolation place.

Check out the IEA studies, PVPS, or Alsema or Fthenakis...

[Bob F]

If the energy to create PVs was anything like the critics say, they'ed have to
be way more expensive. They're not going to give them away.

[Mho]

Real easy but you would have to actually read those studies and be able to
basic math.

Let's say you buy a 1000 Watts of PV panels and get them for a good
price...say $4 per watt and let's not consider the mounting and inverter,
hookup, taxes, permits and electrician costs to accomplish this. so we now
have $4,000 of panels.

Most places the insolation factor is about 4 hours +/- some.

With 365 days per year (we all get that)

and grid energy at say $.10 / kWh (we pay 5.8 cents plus add-ons)

We now have 1000 watts of PV x 4 hours x 365 days x $0.11 = $160 of
generating capacity per anum.

Now your LOI on your money will come to about $4000 x 5% (or more) = $200
per annum.

DO some magic and pay of your $200 per annum in interest alone with your
$160 of generation income.

When you're don't forget to add in the amortization of your additional
factors, the inefficiency of your electronics and maintenance costs. Don't
forget how much more your roof will cost to have the panels all removed and
remounted next shingle change.

There is no payback unless somebody else pays your bills and hides the costs
in everybody else's income tax.

PV welfare anybody?

Only somebody making profits from this can seriously promote PV without
looking foolish.

Artificially high energy rates, subsidies and lower prices help balance the
books.


------------
"Melodie" wrote in message news:4edc8b87$0$7741$426a...@news.free.fr...

Actually, it really depends on how much you are paying for other sources
of electricity. As other sources get more expensive, PV gets more
attractive.

[argusy]

On 19/12/11 3:47 PM, Mho wrote:


Not to put you on the spot, but 1000 * 4 * 365 * .11 divided by 100 (makes it
dollars, not cents) comes to $1606 dollars.

As I pointed out in a previous reply, I do things like this in my head, and got
about $1600.

Now without any other of your arguments to check, you've already shot yourself
in the foot.

Need I say any more about your math or reasoning - I think not

Graham

[danny burstein]

In <4EEEF137...@slmember.on.net> argusy <arg...@slmember.on.net> writes:

>On 19/12/11 3:47 PM, Mho wrote:

>Not to put you on the spot, but 1000 * 4 * 365 * .11 divided by 100 (makes it
>dollars, not cents) comes to $1606 dollars.

Looks like you misplaced a decimal point:

1000 watts/1,000 => 1 kw; 4000/1,000 => 4 kw. Now times 4 hrs -> 4 kw-hr/day

4 kw times 0.10 dollars =>0.40 or 40 cents/day

40 cents times 365 => 14600 cents. Divide by 100 => $ 146.00

(if 11 cents per kw-hr [erlier poster mixed both terms],
you'd see $ 160.60)


[material underneath left for reference]

--
_____________________________________________________
Knowledge may be power, but communications is the key
dan...@panix.com
[to foil spammers, my address has been double rot-13 encoded]

[Ron Rosenfeld]

On Mon, 19 Dec 2011 00:17:04 -0500, "Mho" <Impe...@UgotOCD.invalid> wrote:

>Real easy but you would have to actually read those studies and be able to
>basic math.

Yes you would. You also have to use realistic values when you present your argument.

Melodie writes about ENERGY costs

>Energy payback time is generally under 3 years, but goes as low as under
>1 year if you are in a particularily high insolation place.

You write about DOLLAR costs

>Let's say you buy a 1000 Watts of PV panels and get them for a good
>price...say $4 per watt and let's not consider the mounting and inverter,
>hookup, taxes, permits and electrician costs to accomplish this. so we now
>have $4,000 of panels.

Then you write:

>Most places the insolation factor is about 4 hours +/- some.
>With 365 days per year (we all get that)
>and grid energy at say $.10 / kWh (we pay 5.8 cents plus add-ons)

I don't know where you are located, but in the US, both of those numbers are below average for electricity costs (about $0.13/kWh) as well as for insolation.

For example, in southern California, in many places, average annual insolation is over 6 hours/day. AVERAGE electricity costs in Los Angeles are about $0.20/kWh and may be higher during the day with demand pricing.

Interest rates today available to the average consumer, and for the past several years, have been well under 0.5% per year, so to use a rate of 5%, as you did, is a significant bias.

So let us say our consumer lives in the Los Angeles, CA area where average insolation is 5.4 hrs/day --> 1972.35 kwH/year
At $0.199/kWh (Oct 2011 average rate from the BLS) --> $392.50 savings per year
A 10- year treasury is presently paying 2.11% --> $84.40 per year
Net savings --> $308.10/yr

So even the Dollar payback is positive in southern California. The Energy payback, which is what Melodie wrote, is much better.

Clearly, if you live in northern Canada, and pay $0.05/kWh, and make 5% on your money, it doesn't pay. But that was not the point being made.

[Mho]

Clearly if we stretch all the figured into dream category we may actually
break even on our LOI.

Factor in the cost of moving to and living in SoCal and then recalculate
using loss of income on salary until another job is won.


--------------
"Ron Rosenfeld" wrote in message
news:2ffue7lleng00eta7...@4ax.com...

[Mho]

We all need to go to math school. Yes I stated the power in watts and the
rate in kiloWatthours.

Some assumption of math skills was asserted. The other basic math changes
were injected by the hecklers...LOL

There are three kinds of people in this world. Those that can do math and
those that can't!

----------
"danny burstein" wrote in message news:jcmtlg$5fi$1...@reader1.panix.com...

[Ron Rosenfeld]

On Mon, 19 Dec 2011 12:49:45 -0500, "Mho" <Impe...@UgotOCD.invalid> wrote:

>
>Factor in the cost of moving to and living in SoCal and then recalculate
>using loss of income on salary until another job is won.
>

What a cogent and well-reasoned argument!

I am destroyed and will resign.

Obviously, since we MUST factor in all of those costs in order to properly analyze the energy and dollar paybacks, and we must also use only YOUR values for insolation, cost of electicity and cost of money, you are clearly in the right and further discussion is futile.

[Mho]

I knew you would see the light! Just not off the grid though...LOL

But seriously. Not many people will ever see a payback without subsidies.
Time wear on and the project outlook gets better all the time, though. The
topic gets sickening as many thousands of posts have been made on this same
request to the point of just being a troll posting, now. Listen to your
sales person. He/she knows your wallet best. I did it for grid avoidance for
a few years to build my home and because I love the experiment and
technology. After many cold nights and buying $10,000s of work-around
equipment I wouldn't do it again at those prices. I would have dug a trench
a connected to the grid at much cheaper prices. Today I sit with four of my
panels still in the barn and a two wind turbines looking for a bare spot and
I wonder if the garbage man will take them away. nahhhh... I need more
experimentation and TOU is coming to my door some year. I must be one of the
odd dozen in the province not on TOU, yet. After working in that field for
34 years I know they are having trouble metering my setup...LOL


BTW: Sarcasm doesn't fare well in text only media. Yours was really obvious
to me, this time and I liked the candour. It can bite you in the ass at
times. It has me, many times.

All the best.

----------
"Ron Rosenfeld" wrote in message

news:v11ve7tbekkov83ko...@4ax.com...

[argusy]

On 20/12/11 4:23 AM, Mho wrote:
> We all need to go to math school. Yes I stated the power in watts and the rate
> in kiloWatthours.
>
> Some assumption of math skills was asserted. The other basic math changes were
> injected by the hecklers...LOL
>
> There are three kinds of people in this world. Those that can do math and those
> that can't!
>

<snip>

I like your mathematics!!.

Obviously, I'm in the "those who can't" class.
Like in an earlier post -

Der, graham

.11 is ALREADY in dollars - I just couldn't see it for a while.
so I multiplied by a thousand, then divided by a hundred.

That's a factor of 10. No wonder I got $1606.

I humbly apologise for calling myself "a moron".

Oh, well, it's about time I started using a calculator, anyway.

Just as a matter of interest, I'm now on my third inverter.

The first one died about three weeks after the installation.
The second one died about four weeks ago.
The third is still working, but the brand has me worried.
(Sunnyroo 3000TL - made in China, rebadged as "assembled in Australia")

At least they were under warranty.

Graham

[argusy]

[Ron Rosenfeld]

On Mon, 19 Dec 2011 13:56:26 -0500, "Mho" <Impe...@UgotOCD.invalid> wrote:

>I knew you would see the light! Just not off the grid though...LOL
>
>But seriously. Not many people will ever see a payback without subsidies.

On the serious side, it is absolutely critical to do one's homework properly in order to determine whether PV makes sense in a particular situation.
In my case, the impetus was a $40,000 cost to bring grid power to the property we were looking at.

But my analysis was more detailed than what is usually posted here. I wound up with a hybrid wind-PV system that has had no equipment failures. Given the cost of running the power lines, our payback time was zero, and we've been saving about $1200/yr on the electric bills we might have been paying. That will be more than enough for maintenance and equipment replacement when needed.

[Mho]

Ouch! No malice. Crapola happens all the time on Usenet. Pay attention to it
and no tech talk happens.

I have been working on the same junkyard unit since the beginning of my PV
career and hoping it doesn't die at anytime. I do not know what I will do if
it does! I provides a MPPT battery charger, co-gen and secure power supply
for some circuits in my house. I am not sure what I will do if it goes bad.
The unit was a known fire hazard at 5kW and they derated it in software to
3kW but still with a 10kW peak capacity for 1 minute (really good rating)
just before they went bankrupt or sold out to another company that won't
support it anymore due to new model sales. The interrogation software has
features which are not documented. The battery charger do not appear to
support many of the modes available in the software..etc.. Luckily a nice
tech there shipped me a new EPROM which didn't need to be reset each
morning. I need to get into the thing to clean relay contacts sometime but
after retiring from that crap (35 years) just can't bring myself to do it.
If I ever replace the computer their algorithm is available. maybe, if I beg
really well, on the phone to crack the migrated software installation. The
nice tech left the company.

On the math front I used to be so good at basic arithmetic and now it screws
me up big time. As my own home builder more mistakes have been made due to
my arrogance knowing what arithmetic results are in my head. I am out of
practice, big time. More lumber has been ruined by that arrogance. Damn
father used to drill me when I was 4-5 years old!...LOL Now I use a
calculator, a lot!

--------------
"argusy" wrote in message news:4EF06D39...@slmember.on.net...

[argusy]

<snip>

> On the math front I used to be so good at basic arithmetic and now it screws me
> up big time. As my own home builder more mistakes have been made due to my
> arrogance knowing what arithmetic results are in my head. I am out of practice,
> big time. More lumber has been ruined by that arrogance. Damn father used to
> drill me when I was 4-5 years old!...LOL Now I use a calculator, a lot!
>

not as bad as having your mother teaching at the same school.

I could never get away with saying "Nah, Mum, no homework tonight", knowing damn
well she'd already asked my teacher what I've got.

She'd drill me, too, on maths, English and whatever else she found out what my
teacher had taught on the day.

I was always top of the class with 90% plus, and it STILL wasn't enough!!

I joined the RAAF (apprentice) when I was 15. <grin>

[Mho]

Payback will never be "zero" time but in your case it may be a wise decision
and payback short.
My payback was having fun as a hobby and it did provide some better days
while living off it. It was never cheaper than the grid for me. I know more
about building homes processes now. Not that I would ever do it again, for
me.

-----------

"Ron Rosenfeld" wrote in message

news:rfv0f7tsi7rk6cu5v...@4ax.com...

[Mho]

Yeah run away from where you don't feel appreciated.

Hindsight usually smartens people up.

---------

"argusy" wrote in message news:4EF1B5B4...@slmember.on.net...

[do...@94.usenet.us.com]

Mho <Impe...@ugotocd.invalid> wrote:
> Let's say you buy a 1000 Watts of PV panels and get them for a good
> price...say $4 per watt and let's not consider the mounting and inverter,
> hookup, taxes, permits and electrician costs to accomplish this. so we now
> have $4,000 of panels.

> Most places the insolation factor is about 4 hours +/- some.
> With 365 days per year (we all get that)
> and grid energy at say $.10 / kWh (we pay 5.8 cents plus add-ons)
> We now have 1000 watts of PV x 4 hours x 365 days x $0.11 = $160 of
> generating capacity per anum.

PVWatts says I have 5.48 kWh/m2/day. PG&E says the average is $0.18299.
I let PVWatts do the math. They say $259.30 per year for a fixed panel.

My panels are actually turned a little more north, which is good, because
of time-of-day rates, but a little too flat on my roof.
Still, I did better than the projected 1417kWh per annum, measuring an
actual 1556.
Additionally, I am working against tiered rates, with the PV elimianting kWh at rates
exceeding $0.30 kWh. Plugging in $0.30 gives $425.10.

I also have the Time-of-day in my favor. PV has been a good investment for
me.

> Now your LOI on your money will come to about $4000 x 5% (or more) = $200
> per annum.

I'm not doing 5% on investments recently. Maybe we need to talk.

http://mapserve3.nrel.gov/PVWatts_Viewer/index.html

[Mho]

You made some really poor investments if you are not getting 5% over the
last 20 years or do you only bring your panels out when the market is poor?
Market sucks, huh?

Trouble with those long insolation factors is your panels can't capture it
without a 3D tracker or some Spanish illegal turning them for y'all. We
don't gotz none of those 'ere.

----------
wrote in message news:jd11d7$489$1...@blue-new.rahul.net...