Solar Power for your Residence? Buy, Lease, Wait??? (1 Viewer)

[re_guderian]

Who has solar on their rooftops? I'm tired of the high electric bills. New AC unit last year (thanks Shawn! @Motleyone) really helped, knocking about 60+ bucks a month off in the summer. Talked with a SolarCity guy, and frankly, was disappointed with the savings. Turns out to be about a net savings of ~$50/month on a 3K sq. ft. home. Oh, and then there's AZ's finest in the legislature, making them subject to property tax, reducing that savings to about $35/mo. I was hoping that solar would be more of a savings than that. Seems like not much return for a 20 year commitment on the lease. Am I missing something here? Better technology right around the corner? I sense desperation from APS and SRP, based on their proposals for fees on those who have solar...

Are there still decent incentives to buy? Good loan programs that result in better net savings? Any firsthand experiences? Just wait and see, and try and minimize usage for now?

 

[fengler]

I have a buddy that works for the city of mesa, energy sector - Ill ask him. Mostly posting this as a reminder to myself.

 

[Motleyone]

Solar is not currently worth it for an average single family home. Solar technology changes in leaps and bounds ever year. Some day cost versus savings will get there. The only one currently making money are the companies that install solar. You current best bet is good efficient AC units that are properly charged and operating as designed, good insulation in your walls and attic, block out screens on your windows and ceiling fans. Give me a call anytime I can go on and on.

 

[fengler]

This is what i have heard as well, probably better to invest in dual-pane windows.

 

[LandCruiserPhil]

Best payback lamps

I have solar but it is small enough to avoid the power company. IMO the power company makes it not attractive to me. My set up is on track for 100% payback in less then 5 years. No big company can come close to that payback time even with all the lies they will tell you.

I have been tracking the power I have produced and used since my install on June 12 2012 at 11AM.

 

[brices123]

Best payback lamps

I have solar but it is small enough to avoid the power company. IMO the power company makes it not attractive to me. My set up is on track for 100% payback in less then 5 years. No big company can come close to that payback time even with all the lies they will tell you.

I have been tracking the power I have produced and used since my install on June 12 2012 at 11AM.

Phil,

When the apocalypse happens, the first thing I am doing is bringing mynfamilyntomyiur house!

 

[ItWasntMe]

I work for SolarCity and am actually a residential energy consultant. I have also have a b.s. in environmental and natural resource economics. If anyone here is interested in solar, please pm me. I will work out a mud discount. I very rarely recommend someone going solar if they are saving any less than 50% on their energy bill. Having said this, please realize that this may not happen within the first year. Still, we were able to save my own father (with a 2700 sq/ft house) around 56% here in AZ. There are a lot of different options in obtaining a solar system (outright purchase, lease, lease-to-own, etc.), and not everyone in the company is certified to sell all of them like myself. As far as the technology, we're now at a point where most of the people I work with are able to produce 100% of their power needs from atop their roof (the dept of defense was satisfied with our technology when we installed our systems on their on-base housing units). I don't want this post to sound like a sales pitch, but please feel free to contact me with any questions. I'll also be happy to publicly answer any questions you guys may have.

 

[msahr]

We've looked at this a few times and frankly what seemed pretty good at first, once I read the fine print, was not really, at least for me. Seems like every commercially installed system out there is just a "on-grid savings" type system, if the power from your friendly utility monopoly goes down for whatever reason, you are still without power, too. Now maybe an outright purchase scenario would be better as I would be free to run a charge controller and a bank of batteries to run most of my essential appliances, so I could see that. I hear radio ads for a company that says you can purchase outright and keep the tax rebate. Confused...

 

[re_guderian]

I work for SolarCity and am actually a residential energy consultant. I have also have a b.s. in environmental and natural resource economics. If anyone here is interested in solar, please pm me. I will work out a mud discount. I very rarely recommend someone going solar if they are saving any less than 50% on their energy bill. Having said this, please realize that this may not happen within the first year. Still, we were able to save my own father (with a 2700 sq/ft house) around 56% here in AZ. There are a lot of different options in obtaining a solar system (outright purchase, lease, lease-to-own, etc.), and not everyone in the company is certified to sell all of them like myself. As far as the technology, we're now at a point where most of the people I work with are able to produce 100% of their power needs from atop their roof (the dept of defense was satisfied with our technology when we installed our systems on their on-base housing units). I don't want this post to sound like a sales pitch, but please feel free to contact me with any questions. I'll also be happy to publicly answer any questions you guys may have.

After reading the contract details, I'm skeptical of the >50% claim. Based on the KwH charges quoted to me from the solar company, I'm only saving <20% per Kwh over what I'm being charged by APS, with 97% generation. And I still have to pay all the monthly fixed costs to APS. It doesn't even appear to be remotely worth eliminating all future options for 20 years (and there's no way I'll be in this house for more than 5-8 more). I'm just confused as to why people that have solar are raving about it. Did I get the "sucker's first quote" and need to negotiate? Or do people just not look at the math? The annual increase on the solar is darn near what the historical increase for APS has been, too.

 

[ItWasntMe]

We've looked at this a few times and frankly what seemed pretty good at first, once I read the fine print, was not really, at least for me. Seems like every commercially installed system out there is just a "on-grid savings" type system, if the power from your friendly utility monopoly goes down for whatever reason, you are still without power, too. Now maybe an outright purchase scenario would be better as I would be free to run a charge controller and a bank of batteries to run most of my essential appliances, so I could see that. I hear radio ads for a company that says you can purchase outright and keep the tax rebate. Confused...

If you have the funds, outright purchasing your system is always going to save the most money over time, if that's what you're looking for. The lease model was developed because most people don't have $30k cash to throw down on a solar system. If you're purchasing a system though, you absolutely should be keeping the tax rebate. The federal rebate is a tax credit of 30% of the total system cost (depending on where you're at, there are some state level incentives as well). In a lease, the company keeps the tax credit so that you may have low, fixed monthly payments without paying anything out-of-pocket. You also pay NO property tax on a leased system. If you're looking to get a system that will function off-the-grid, then yes, you'll have to assemble a power bank. Unfortunately, this could easily double the cost of your system (the battery-related technology is what is still changing constantly, the PV panels not so much).

After reading the contract details, I'm skeptical of the >50% claim. Based on the KwH charges quoted to me from the solar company, I'm only saving <20% per Kwh over what I'm being charged by APS, with 97% generation. And I still have to pay all the monthly fixed costs to APS. It doesn't even appear to be remotely worth eliminating all future options for 20 years (and there's no way I'll be in this house for more than 5-8 more). I'm just confused as to why people that have solar are raving about it. Did I get the "sucker's first quote" and need to negotiate? Or do people just not look at the math? The annual increase on the solar is darn near what the historical increase for APS has been, too.

Im curious as to when you received a quote. There are several different ways of setting up these contracts, and it sounds like you may have only been presented with one. I wouldn't say you got a sucker's quote, because we can't really negotiate. But we can play with different variables, such as your price escalator. If you're likely to move in the next 5-8 years, then we could tailor your system to save as much as possible during those 5-8 years, so that you benefit as much as possible before moving. Then, when you do move, your solar lease transfers to the new homeowners just like any other utility would. Houses with leased solar end up selling much faster and for a higher price as well (I can find my stats to back that up). I totally get not wanting to lock yourself into something for 20 years. However, its necessary for the leasing business model. No one's going to be excited about signing a 20 year contract on anything. But it's not like we won't be running our houses on electricity in 20 years. You're still going to need it. I tell people you can think of it as guaranteeing cheap and clean energy for the next 20 years, as opposed to being stuck in a contract. You'd be paying for the same electricity from the utility monopoly anyway, but it would cost you more and prices can change when they feel like it.

 

[LandCruiserPhil]

If you have the funds, outright purchasing your system is always going to save the most money over time, if that's what you're looking for. The lease model was developed because most people don't have $30k cash to throw down on a solar system. If you're purchasing a system though, you absolutely should be keeping the tax rebate. The federal rebate is a tax credit of 30% of the total system cost (depending on where you're at, there are some state level incentives as well). In a lease, the company keeps the tax credit so that you may have low, fixed monthly payments without paying anything out-of-pocket. You also pay NO property tax on a leased system. If you're looking to get a system that will function off-the-grid, then yes, you'll have to assemble a power bank. Unfortunately, this could easily double the cost of your system (the battery-related technology is what is still changing constantly, the PV panels not so much).



Im curious as to when you received a quote. There are several different ways of setting up these contracts, and it sounds like you may have only been presented with one. I wouldn't say you got a sucker's quote, because we can't really negotiate. But we can play with different variables, such as your price escalator. If you're likely to move in the next 5-8 years, then we could tailor your system to save as much as possible during those 5-8 years, so that you benefit as much as possible before moving. Then, when you do move, your solar lease transfers to the new homeowners just like any other utility would. Houses with leased solar end up selling much faster and for a higher price as well (I can find my stats to back that up). I totally get not wanting to lock yourself into something for 20 years. However, its necessary for the leasing business model. No one's going to be excited about signing a 20 year contract on anything. But it's not like we won't be running our houses on electricity in 20 years. You're still going to need it. I tell people you can think of it as guaranteeing cheap and clean energy for the next 20 years, as opposed to being stuck in a contract. You'd be paying for the same electricity from the utility monopoly anyway, but it would cost you more and prices can change when they feel like it.

Do the estimates Solar City provide figure in the panels output to 80% at best after 20 years?

 

[re_guderian]

Do the estimates Solar City provide figure in the panels output to 80% at best after 20 years?

They have to since they guarantee a utility buy-back amount over the life of the lease. They just pad it into the Kwh charge that they lock you in at. Here's the other thing if you lease - you don't ever realize any savings from any future energy/appliance upgrades that you do, since you are locked into a fixed monthly payment, with annual increases only slightly less than APS historical ones. So if I install a new AC unit this summer, SolarCity reaps all the efficiency benefits from it via more buyback from APS while my monthly rate remains the same. However, if you exceed your current usage, you're buying the difference at market rates from the utility. Think I'm going to pass until it's a little more compelling than just renting out my rooftop to SolarCity for $35 a month (which is in essence what I'd be doing). Granted, it's a true zero out of pocket, but I'm still not convinced it's worth locking out all short-term future options - for me starting with a better energy audit of my current usage...

 

[LandCruiserPhil]

Do overlook the added cost when its time to re-roof

I believe the best value savings it to just lower your KWH usage through lamps, reducing your phantom loads, shading, and water heater timers if all electric. Many people dont realize how loads add up over time buy a watt miser meter it will open your eyes.

 

[Living in the Past]

My daughter just bought a house in Nov. that has solar. I waiting to see what her savings are going to be. It is a leased system but that's all I know. I talked to a guy from Solar City I think, he was at Home Depot. Like mentioned the saving he was talking about excluded the amount your going to pay the utility just for having the power on your home no matter if your using power or not. Plus only hope to spend one more summer in the valley. After that I plan to drain the pool, turn off the A/C and water. I thought about having solar panel then adding power into the grid but it's the solar company making the most. I know they are providing the equipment but it would be my roof their using. My current roof is ten years old. Come time to replace it your dealing with removing and reinstalling solar panels. If I wanted to be able to live off the grid the valley would not be my choice. There are ways to heat and not need electricity. Cooling on the other hand requires electricity. Cooler is cheaper to run but who wants to live in the valley in July and August with just a cooler. Instead of solar I've always wonder why thermal storage was never use. How many unused pools are there in the valley. Chilled the water at night and use it during the day. When the city of Phoenix built a new city hall 92/93 they also built a parking garage next to it. That has thermal storage under it. Over time they converted their other buildings in the area to the storage system. Then there is the underground chilled water system in downtown Phoenix. Used to be called North Wind but I believe that changed. The main plant is just south of the ball park downtown. Not sure if they still do but the ball park chillers were used at night to help chill the water for North Wind. When the city of Phoenix built it's new convention center it went on to this system. A new plant was added under third street. Before I would look into buying my own solar panels I would look into thermal storage. Unlike solar that is effected by clouds and shorter days power companies are willing to sell cheap power every night.

 

[ItWasntMe]

They have to since they guarantee a utility buy-back amount over the life of the lease. They just pad it into the Kwh charge that they lock you in at. Here's the other thing if you lease - you don't ever realize any savings from any future energy/appliance upgrades that you do, since you are locked into a fixed monthly payment, with annual increases only slightly less than APS historical ones. So if I install a new AC unit this summer, SolarCity reaps all the efficiency benefits from it via more buyback from APS while my monthly rate remains the same. However, if you exceed your current usage, you're buying the difference at market rates from the utility. Think I'm going to pass until it's a little more compelling than just renting out my rooftop to SolarCity for $35 a month (which is in essence what I'd be doing). Granted, it's a true zero out of pocket, but I'm still not convinced it's worth locking out all short-term future options - for me starting with a better energy audit of my current usage...

I agree with a lot of what you're saying. And I do think an energy audit is a great place to start for everyone. It's true that you wouldn't realize savings from more efficient appliances if your system was already offsetting 100% of your usage. Though accounting for anticipated future usage is a big part of what I do. Sometimes people are planning to install a pool, or sometimes their kids are moving out of the house in a few years. Still, if you do use more/less than your system produces, it's not like a cellphone contract. If you use less than your system produces, that power is accounted for, and is then yours to use later on. If you use more than what your roof is making, you draw from that bank you've created. We do a lot of installations in the winter because people want to build up energy credit before the summer hits and usage goes up.

In states other than AZ, you can set up your contract so that you only pay for the solar power that you use, not what's being produced. In this case, yes you kind of are renting your roof to the company, in exchange for cheap power. That would allow you to realize the benefits of increasing usage efficiency as well.

I'll post a link on aps's rate increases

 

[LandCruiserPhil]

The best way to hedge APS rate increases is to buy PNW stock

 

[ItWasntMe]

A roof inspection is part of our process, so you can have an idea of what it's lifespan is looking like. In some cases, no it won't make sense to install a system. If you do need to have the system removed and then reinstalled at any point during your lease (other than initial installation and removal), it's a flat $500. Your house is also insured to $2 million against damages caused by the company or the system.

The savings estimates they give out at Home Depot and best buy and all that, are really rough. Since I work system by system, I'm able to spend a lot more time running numbers with people. I have spreadsheets that show much more detailed calculations, and they do include things like the minimum grid connection bill. I'd be happy to send that to anyone if they'd like to see the math themselves.

I'm not someone who will ever try to push solar on anyone, and of course it's not for everybody. I'm not a salesman and I don't want to be one. I studied and now work in this field because I really enjoy it, and SolarCity was the company I sought out because they do the best work and have made solar available to countless people that wouldn't have had it otherwise. For a lot of people, it's a great option and saves a lot of money.

There's a lot of misinformation around everywhere and I just want to make sure it's fairly represented. Like I said, I'll be happy to answer any questions.

 

[Living in the Past]

if you do use more/less than your system produces, it's not like a cellphone contract. If you use less than your system produces, that power is accounted for, and is then yours to use later on. If you use more than what your roof is making, you draw from that bank you've created. We do a lot of installations in the winter because people want to build up energy credit before the summer hits and usage goes up.

I'll post a link on aps's rate increases

There are cell phone plans that let you bank your minutes but to me it would be worthless since we never come close to using our minutes. Need to run out to draw from the bank of minutes. Since we don't plan on being here for most of the year after my wife retires unless we're seeing a check every month for all the unused power the panels generates it useless. I would end up with a surplus every month. I'm not sure how big a surplus you would generate in the winter. It depends a lot on how cold the winter to how much power ussed. Add in to it the days are shorter and sun is further south. I would assume high noon in the winter your generating less then power then in the summer when the sun it overhead.

While I have APS power their rate increases do not effect us. We are in a SRP neighborhood serviced by APS. we fill out a form once a year and send it to SRP. They then send us a check for the difference we paid.

 

[re_guderian]

A roof inspection is part of our process, so you can have an idea of what it's lifespan is looking like. In some cases, no it won't make sense to install a system. If you do need to have the system removed and then reinstalled at any point during your lease (other than initial installation and removal), it's a flat $500. Your house is also insured to $2 million against damages caused by the company or the system.

The savings estimates they give out at Home Depot and best buy and all that, are really rough. Since I work system by system, I'm able to spend a lot more time running numbers with people. I have spreadsheets that show much more detailed calculations, and they do include things like the minimum grid connection bill. I'd be happy to send that to anyone if they'd like to see the math themselves.

I'm not someone who will ever try to push solar on anyone, and of course it's not for everybody. I'm not a salesman and I don't want to be one. I studied and now work in this field because I really enjoy it, and SolarCity was the company I sought out because they do the best work and have made solar available to countless people that wouldn't have had it otherwise. For a lot of people, it's a great option and saves a lot of money.

There's a lot of misinformation around everywhere and I just want to make sure it's fairly represented. Like I said, I'll be happy to answer any questions.

I do have to say that i was impressed with the customer service, warranty offered, and comprehensiveness of SolarCity's program. Everything looked GREAT on paper until we got to the Kwh charge. I'll PM you. Maybe I just don't understand the economics of it. I also get the necessity to pay APS for the grid connection, etc. etc. I DO need new roof felt, (27 years old) and would have to have that done anyway before installation, so that's not a worry, and the $500 fee is more than fair for whatever comes up later.

Gonna start now with some metering of my usage overall, and see if I can identify and fix some of the energy hogs in my home. I have ~3K sq ft, and pay an AVERAGE of $360/month. Seems a little steep. I also have no gas (all electric) and 3 teenage daughters living at home House is 27 years old, but does have double pane windows, new GE 50 gal water heater, one new 15 SEER heat pump, one crappy old one. But still just 2x4 walls, blown in insulation above 2nd story, and who-knows-how-much batting over the greatroom trusses. I have a second frig in the garage (location sucks, but no interior option.) I'll report back with some better numbers next week. Ordered an overall usage meter that should help determine usage of things like lights, dryer, AC/Heat, etc. as well as a plug in watt meter. Will go to town this weekend.

 

[ItWasntMe]

Yes for you, I would say solar is not the way to go. But then again, your energy bills are not going to be very high to begin with, if you're not there very often. So there's not much money that could be saved. If you were there more, it might be different. As for production, yes it differs with day length, exposure, etc., and we compensate for all of that. Every system we do goes through several stages of engineering, and includes 3d modeling of all potential shading obstructions and gps to obtain sun angles. We wouldn't be offering production guarantees if we didn't know precisely what the system would produce.