What do you think of my quote for 6KW in SoCal?

[russ]

Most people(myself included) come to this forum thinking the Chinese stuff is bad. What I learned here is that stuff that we think is Canadian or American is actually Chinese and that Chinese stuff isn't all bad. I learned a bunch of stuff from people that have been through the process and from people on the other side of the process. I also learned that Russ use to sell vacuum cleaners and doesn't always take his happy pills

OK, OK - I just went and took my happy pill for the day!

It all depends on who is in charge of Quality Control. If it is GE, Bosch, Apple and such then what comes from China can be as good as any. The problem in Asia is no one seems to trust anyone. If you get a promise from a supplier you make sure you get a bank guarantee to go with it. The promise by itself is usually worthless.

Chinese companies can do good QC for themselves - providing the boss demands it.

[Ward L]

We go to forums to get opinions and hopefully we care what people think and say. I'm happy with what I got and hopefully everyone will benefit from their own solar decisions. You do have to realize that not every comment is necessarily the right answer. We can't all think the same, if we did, we would all buy the exact same thing. Whatever!

[J.P.M.]

We go to forums to get opinions and hopefully we care what people think and say. I'm happy with what I got and hopefully everyone will benefit from their own solar decisions. You do have to realize that not every comment is necessarily the right answer. We can't all think the same, if we did, we would all buy the exact same thing. Whatever!

And none of us is as smart as all of us.

[JohnInSoCal]

that's a decent price for micro. My lowest quotes in southern california (inland empire) are $3.60 for 8KW system with canadian solar panels / SMA string inverters. Get a quote for string inverters it will likely be a little cheaper. Also get multiple quotes and the price WILL go down. I started my quest in the $5 a watt range, now I have quotes at $3.60 and one quote of a post incentive quote of $2.21 a watt with doing some insulation and other energy efficiency work along with solar. Pre-paid lease can also be had at around $2.20 a watt.

[insaneoctane]

...
About the best source to compare anything about PV systems in CA is the CSI database. One way to think of it is that it's most everything the vendors don't want you to know about what's been sold in CA. Now that the CSI program is running down, some of the info is trailing off. System owners who choose to get on the wait list will still have their systems listed.

JPM-
Great tip with the database. I am already an engineer who loves data...this little gem was amazing. Even though I am pretty capable with Excel, the over 175,000 entries was challenging for both me and my quad core CPU! In the end I was able to find contractors Who either had installed in my area or reasonably close (I added a cool function that calculated distance from installed zip code to my zip code) that had a good amount of installations under their belt, and looked at $ per watt figures while considering array size, looking at last 6 months, etc etc... I feel very good about my price now at $3.67/W with micro inverters or $3.50 with a central inverter. I will have to get more shading analysis to help me decide if I want micros or not (the engineer in me certainly wants the panel level data of course). Thanks again

[J.P.M.]

JPM-
Great tip with the database. I am already an engineer who loves data...this little gem was amazing. Even though I am pretty capable with Excel, the over 175,000 entries was challenging for both me and my quad core CPU! In the end I was able to find contractors Who either had installed in my area or reasonably close (I added a cool function that calculated distance from installed zip code to my zip code) that had a good amount of installations under their belt, and looked at $ per watt figures while considering array size, looking at last 6 months, etc etc... I feel very good about my price now at $3.67/W with micro inverters or $3.50 with a central inverter. I will have to get more shading analysis to help me decide if I want micros or not (the engineer in me certainly wants the panel level data of course). Thanks again

I've learned to live w/out much reinforcement, but once in awhile it's sweet. Thanx for the feedback.

It can be a slick tool as an adjunct to common sense and hard work. Updates Weds. eve., 1X/week.

Combing and scraping the file can reduce the size, but I've always found it to be large, regardless. I dump cancelled jobs, commercial and large gen., gov., nonprofit, and residential stuff >> ~ 15 kW. I then usually sort by date and then sort further as the sought parameter(s) dictate. Still usually > 10^^5 rows however, depending.

If you like our service tell your friends. We're fee free.

Welcome to the neighborhood.

[insaneoctane]

JPM,
Can you confirm I'm using the right fields for my analysis? Im using the "Total Cost" field (assuming the price is BEFORE tax credits/subsidies) and dividing by ("CEC PTC Rating"*1,000)? Hmmm, now that I type this, maybe I should be using nameplate rating? There are lots of very similar fields and I've been making assumptions that I'd like to check against someone who's used the database. Thanks!

Ex.
Application Number SD-CSI-22156
Program Administrator CCSE
Program Small Commercial (< 10 kW) and All Residential
Incentive Design $0.20 per Watt EPBB
Incentive Type EPBB
Incentive Step Step 10
Incentive Amount 365
Total Cost $9,468.00
Cost/W $5.08 ***MY CALC***
Cost/W family $5.00 ***MY CALC***
Nameplate Rating 2.2
CEC PTC Rating 1.864
.
.
.

Oh, and I used your simplifying suggestion and was able to shed a LOT of unneeded data, thanks again.

[J.P.M.]

JPM,
Can you confirm I'm using the right fields for my analysis? Im using the "Total Cost" field (assuming the price is BEFORE tax credits/subsidies) and dividing by ("CEC PTC Rating"*1,000)? Hmmm, now that I type this, maybe I should be using nameplate rating? There are lots of very similar fields and I've been making assumptions that I'd like to check against someone who's used the database. Thanks!

Ex.
Application Number SD-CSI-22156
Program Administrator CCSE
Program Small Commercial (< 10 kW) and All Residential
Incentive Design $0.20 per Watt EPBB
Incentive Type EPBB
Incentive Step Step 10
Incentive Amount 365
Total Cost $9,468.00
Cost/W $5.08 ***MY CALC***
Cost/W family $5.00 ***MY CALC***
Nameplate Rating 2.2
CEC PTC Rating 1.864
.
.
.

Oh, and I used your simplifying suggestion and was able to shed a LOT of unneeded data, thanks again.

You're welcome. I use the nameplate rating and total cost for entry in $$/Watt column I added. More later.

[pleppik]

To quote Richard Feynman: What do you care what other people think ?

Not to be overly pedantic, but I believe this was actually said by Feynman's wife, to Feynman. Though Feynman told the story in his autobiography, so I suppose you would be technically correct in that Feynman also said it when he quoted his wife.

Since Feynman was famous for ignoring social convention, his wife was naturally shocked when he suddenly cared about making a good impression on someone.

[J.P.M.]

Not to be overly pedantic, but I believe this was actually said by Feynman's wife, to Feynman. Though Feynman told the story in his autobiography, so I suppose you would be technically correct in that Feynman also said it when he quoted his wife.

Since Feynman was famous for ignoring social convention, his wife was naturally shocked when he suddenly cared about making a good impression on someone.

I try to cite references and credit sources as much as possible to avoid taking credit that belongs to others. In this case I believe I must concede your point. I'll redouble my efforts to give credit correctly and be more careful in citing references in the future.

Now, at the risk of being pedantic, and possibly accused of separating fly frass from pepper, I'll point out that writing "overly pedantic" is, in the usual sense, redundant. If someone is pedantic, they may be said to be overly concerned about something - the overly is already implied in the use of the word. Thus: overly pedantic = overly overly concerned. Also, I'm not sure that Feynman work is actually autobiographical in nature as much as a collection of stories from his life, with a lot about the 1st shuttle disaster investigation, but that's an arguable point that I have no interest in pursuing.

In any case I don't think any of this off topic pissing match changes the sense of what I was suggesting in the subject post. The last word is yours.

[J.P.M.]

JPM,
Can you confirm I'm using the right fields for my analysis? Im using the "Total Cost" field (assuming the price is BEFORE tax credits/subsidies) and dividing by ("CEC PTC Rating"*1,000)? Hmmm, now that I type this, maybe I should be using nameplate rating? There are lots of very similar fields and I've been making assumptions that I'd like to check against someone who's used the database. Thanks!

Ex.
Application Number SD-CSI-22156
Program Administrator CCSE
Program Small Commercial (< 10 kW) and All Residential
Incentive Design $0.20 per Watt EPBB
Incentive Type EPBB
Incentive Step Step 10
Incentive Amount 365
Total Cost $9,468.00
Cost/W $5.08 ***MY CALC***
Cost/W family $5.00 ***MY CALC***
Nameplate Rating 2.2
CEC PTC Rating 1.864
.
.
.

Oh, and I used your simplifying suggestion and was able to shed a LOT of unneeded data, thanks again.

More as promised per prior post.

1.) No criticism or offense intended, but the short answer to your question above is no. Only you can define what's "right" for your purposes. You can do it any way you want. I can only say how I do it and give reasons with the caveat that opinions vary. I calculate total cost/Watt by dividing column "H", Total Cost ($$'s) by column "I", Nameplate Rating (Watts) to get $$'s/Watt. To me this is the easiest, most straightforward and clearest way to compare the unit cost of all the systems listed.

2.) So, for SD-CSI-22156: Total cost = $9,468. System size, i.e. Nameplate Rating == 2,200 Watts --->>> ( $9,468/2,200 W) = $4.30/(nameplate)Watt.

3.) My simple mind needs to know how much something cost and how big it is. After that, if I choose, I can get fancy w/CEC,PTC and other rating methods, used to calc incentive amounts, but $/Watt on a common, simple basis is where I begin.

4.) The other columns that deal with other rating parameters and CSI incentive parameters are important for other reasons, and while important for other reasons and for other calcs, for me obscure getting at the meat and potatoes up front in a clear, unambiguous way free of all the smoke, mirrors and crap that only confuse (me at least) and give shysters & peddlers more tools to confuse. FWIW, note that after the dust settles, almost all current incentive payments are <$.20/nameplate Watt, due to all systems being derated for incentive payment purposes.

5.) There are more ways to sort/play w/the data than can be enumerated here. For example, sometimes I pull the SDG & E data to another sheet and do further sorting there. Options are limited only by the imagination.

[pleppik]

I try to cite references and credit sources as much as possible to avoid taking credit that belongs to others. In this case I believe I must concede your point. I'll redouble my efforts to give credit correctly and be more careful in citing references in the future.

I think it pretty much goes without saying that anytime someone begins a statement with "Not to be overly pedantic," whatever follows is guaranteed to be a fine example of Internet pedantry taken to an absurd extreme.

Your response was perfect in every way, and I salute you for it. Touche.

[insaneoctane]

For anyone who is still following this thread for it's intent, here's some more data:
The company who offered me the bid in message #1 has installed 4,731 systems in California. That's about 5th behind the PPA giants like SolarCity, Verengo and REC Solar. I've been getting additional bids (including entertaining some pre-pay leases) to see where I'm at and with the exception of one (which I'll share at the end), they have ALL been higher to much higher. I was amazed at how much the pre-pay can be....it's far cheaper for me to buy and own than lease, go figure. The only offer that has been better is a pre-paid lease and looks like this:

Company info (per CSI database): They've only installed 41 systems in California and only 3 in the last 2 years (that's kind of a red flag to me)

6KW system 24 SOLARWORLD SW250 mono panels with 24 SolarEdge Optimizers (claimed EAP as 8,919- this seems low to me)
$9,495
Tax = $855
10 year pre-pay lease = $10,350
Cost to buy system after 10 years is *claimed* to 10% of pre-pay lease price: $1,035
After 10 years and buying the system for $1,035 at end my total investment is $11,385 ($1.90/W)

So, I have questions for you guys. I've been told by the big PPA leasors that legally they can't publish the cost of the system at the end of the lease, that it must be "fair market value" and that if anyone is able to tell me how much that is they are lying. Hmmm, well here is a company that says the leasing company DOES tell me how much it is and it's 10% and he claims it will be in WRITING. I understand that a pre-pay lease has the opportunity to save more because the leasing company gets to depreciate the equipment costs, unlike the homeowner. To be honest, this is why I was getting some quotes for pre-pay leases to see if I could find a company that would pass any of that saving on to ME. So, while the $/W is the best I've seen, I don't know if the savings will make me do a pre-pay lease with the "uncertainty" about how it ends. Plus, the company doesn't have many installs lately, which makes me question how much longer they'll be around since the state and fed subsidies are drying up....

By the way, here's how the data looks the way I sliced it. Here are the top 5 sellers that have installed in my zipcode. The first column of total installs includes non-residental too and looks at the ENTIRE CSI database since 2007. The rest of the data is only last 2 years...

CA installs, total	Company	Residental installs in last 2 years	Avg # panels	Avg $/kW	$ installed
24,314	SolarCity	56	21.9	4.8	$1,472,156
12,038	Verengo Solar	1,084	23.9	5.1	$32,609,841
8,815	REC Solar, Inc.	275	23.4	4.6	$7,316,255
6,057	REAL GOODS ENERGY TECH INC dba REAL GOODS SOLAR	11	21.4	4.8	$271,379
4,731	PETERSEN-DEAN INC. dba PETERSENDEAN	32	21.5	4.3	$734,364

[J.P.M.]

For anyone who is still following this thread for it's intent, here's some more data:
The company who offered me the bid in message #1 has installed 4,731 systems in California. That's about 5th behind the PPA giants like SolarCity, Verengo and REC Solar. I've been getting additional bids (including entertaining some pre-pay leases) to see where I'm at and with the exception of one (which I'll share at the end), they have ALL been higher to much higher. I was amazed at how much the pre-pay can be....it's far cheaper for me to buy and own than lease, go figure. The only offer that has been better is a pre-paid lease and looks like this:

Company info (per CSI database): They've only installed 41 systems in California and only 3 in the last 2 years (that's kind of a red flag to me)

6KW system 24 SOLARWORLD SW250 mono panels with 24 SolarEdge Optimizers (claimed EAP as 8,919- this seems low to me)
$9,495
Tax = $855
10 year pre-pay lease = $10,350
Cost to buy system after 10 years is *claimed* to 10% of pre-pay lease price: $1,035
After 10 years and buying the system for $1,035 at end my total investment is $11,385 ($1.90/W)

So, I have questions for you guys. I've been told by the big PPA leasors that legally they can't publish the cost of the system at the end of the lease, that it must be "fair market value" and that if anyone is able to tell me how much that is they are lying. Hmmm, well here is a company that says the leasing company DOES tell me how much it is and it's 10% and he claims it will be in WRITING. I understand that a pre-pay lease has the opportunity to save more because the leasing company gets to depreciate the equipment costs, unlike the homeowner. To be honest, this is why I was getting some quotes for pre-pay leases to see if I could find a company that would pass any of that saving on to ME. So, while the $/W is the best I've seen, I don't know if the savings will make me do a pre-pay lease with the "uncertainty" about how it ends. Plus, the company doesn't have many installs lately, which makes me question how much longer they'll be around since the state and fed subsidies are drying up....

By the way, here's how the data looks the way I sliced it. Here are the top 5 sellers that have installed in my zipcode. The first column of total installs includes non-residental too and looks at the ENTIRE CSI database since 2007. The rest of the data is only last 2 years...

CA installs, total	Company	Residental installs in last 2 years	Avg # panels	Avg $/kW	$ installed
24,314	SolarCity	56	21.9	4.8	$1,472,156
12,038	Verengo Solar	1,084	23.9	5.1	$32,609,841
8,815	REC Solar, Inc.	275	23.4	4.6	$7,316,255
6,057	REAL GOODS ENERGY TECH INC dba REAL GOODS SOLAR	11	21.4	4.8	$271,379
4,731	PETERSEN-DEAN INC. dba PETERSENDEAN	32	21.5	4.3	$734,364

1.) In terms of vendors, bigger does not necessarily mean better. I'd snoop around for quality local elec. contractors w/a track record of jobs, hopefully a fair # of them being recent.

2.) I think vendors may not be able to publish what system costs will be in 10 yrs. because they don't know what FMV will be in 10 yrs. However, that does not mean they cannot tell you what they will sell you a system for in 10 yrs., regardless of value. They can sell it to you for, say $1.00 if they wish. Besides, things get tricky in terms of tax treatment, but that's something I'm mostly ignorant about.

3.) That recent dearth of jobs would cause me some concern as well.

4.) Looks like decent quality can be had for ~$3.50-$4.00 real rough 1st approx.

5.) Caveat Emptor.

[insaneoctane]

Since you ask:

... I'd second the suggestion about micros ...

Well, several people (and forum threads) recommended against me choosing micro-inverters unless absolutely necessary. I REALLY want them because I like the precise data on a per panel basis that they provide. But, it was a "want" for me and likely not a "need" (pending shading analysis) and people's concerns over longevity and reliability certainly got me thinking twice.

So, today, after instructing my contractor to re-layout my roof again (they were unnecessarily avoiding my rooftop heat exchanger that is non-functional). My suggested layout removed the heat exchanger and conveniently allowed future expansion of 2 more panels on my south facing roof. Next, we discussed the shading analysis which indicated I have a next to no shading in my layout. After some philosophical conversations about micro vs central, I expressed my concern that the micros might not be cost effective (or necessary) for me and asked my project manager what the monthly production difference between micros and central would be. After plugging in the 96.5% efficiency for micros vs 95% efficiency for the Fronius IG Plus V 6.0-1 UNI he estimated (I think he approximated in his head) about 50 kwH/month difference. This seems too high to me... I could run some numbers to check that (I probably will), but instead I said I'm paying $2,600 for micros and gateway that give me about 50Kwh/mo. I asked how much would it cost to put the extra 2 solar panels up there NOW instead of the micros and gateway....after some quick calculations, he said about $1,750 installed. I told him I would rather have 2 extra panels and save $850 ($2,600 inverters - $1,750 panels) than have micro-inverters. I felt like that is more the common belief around here by the SMEs and I think I've even convinced myself of that fact (and now my contractor), so I'd like to hear that you guys approve...Would you guys choose 6.5kW central + $850 savings vs 6.0kW micros? With the prospect of the loss of my micro-inverter data, I'm looking for comfort!

Also, does anyone think 26 x 250 kWh (SolarWorld SW 250 poly / Version 2.0 and 2.5 Frame) is too much for the Fronius IG Plus V 6.0-1 UNI? I suspect they weren't going to automatically upgrade that.

This is still somewhat conversational at this point. I still need to see the details of the change order and see if it materializes to what we verbally discussed.