This is mental information. So the average UK price per KW is approx 200% of the US and Sweden is 300%. I always wondered how you guys could afford to run AC in the hotter states.
I assume Solar is high on the agenda in Sweden. In any event, I'm an advocate of Solar, irrespective of where you live. That said, I can't afford the initial outlay, we don't have consistent sun and my roof is west facing (northern hemisphere).
We'll, this topic has certainly sparked conversation guys. Thanks for your input, food for thought!
Me too, but while I think it's a cool technology, it still has to make fiscal sense. I don't like it so much that I will install it at a personal financial loss, regardless if I can afford to or not.
The solar break even calculations when you talk with the sales guys assume an outrageous year-over-year price increase for electricity. Every time I ran the numbers, the payback was 15 to 20 years...as this assumes you have to replace failed electronics and damaged panels.
To do solar right, you have to have enough generation capacity to have your house run totally off solar...and then storage capacity (aka the "Tesla Wall") to store the excess generation for use when the sun doesn't shine.
The other thing you get with the "solar sales pitch" is that you get to "spin your meter backwards, and sell electricity back to the power company". This is ridiculous for two reasons:
You get hardly anything when you "sell it back"
The electric grid doesn't even use it (the solar panels on your house is not a strong enough generator to even cause a blip on the grid...and it can cause issues with voltage regulation at your house).
And finally, if you really, really, want to do it right, you need a whole house backup generator (the best run off natural gas) that run your house when the power goes out.
The talk about renewable energy on a massive scale (aka the power company) is now just a political discussion.
Solar and wind are not "strong" generation sources...meaning you get what you get, and their output fluctuates as clouds go by or when the wind dies down. When this happens the utility company needs to have "standby generation" available to replace the lost generation capacity from the renewables. Said differently, you still have to have the excess energy "ready to go"...so you are still consuming fossil...the gain is very small.
To make renewable energy work and practical on a large scale, it needs to be stored (like a mega-super Tesla wall) and then used to supplement fossil fuel generation in a controlled capacity. Battery technology isn't there yet.
The best usage for renewable energy currently is to use the renewable energy to pump water back up into the reservoir that is behind a hydro electric plant.
I have found only one case study where all the factors were reported. Many company based "case studies" use a grossly inflated future cost of energy. This fellow who lives in Utah concluded that the cost is pretty much a wash. His experience was no loss, no gain.
I'm not interested enough to pursue the real costs however I'll bet there is a hook in "the power company will pay you for your excess power". My bill is pretty much 50% electricity and 50% delivery. I'm sure the power company credits your excess at the generation rate and resells it at the generation + delivery rate.
Intuitively it seems like spreading solar collection over many homes instead of consolidating them in a solar farm is not the best avenue.
Yeah I had a company give me a quote and I about fell out of my chair when he was walking me through the cost. Did a little math adding up all of my electric bills in the past 17 years I’ve owned this house and that sum was cheaper than the solar quote. Just doesn’t make sense for NC. When I lived in CA that was another story.
