north facing array

[J.P.M.]

Most likely to be replaced by an even dirtier shirt, unfortunately....

Given the dearth of folks standing in line to offer some community service around here, probably not, but I'll check the laundromat for reruns on garments. Failing that, maybe one of my pooch friends could step into the breach. They're probably smarter, smell better and like people more.

[inetdog]

I have a horrible mental image of being smothered in wet kisses by the new HOA board member(s).

[J.P.M.]

I never said anything about he is wrong about HOA.

I do appreciate people who spent time to take the responsibility of HOA board. If any of mine HOA board members think it is easier to deal with dogs than people, I'll vote him out for sure. HOA is to serves the community not dictate. HOA isn't a fulfillment of retirement.

Silver - It just occurred to be that you may have never heard the very old saying I used about liking dogs more that people, and are thus perhaps unaware of my unintended use of the phrase as a sarcastic aphorism. My apologies.

[J.P.M.]

I have a horrible mental image of being smothered in wet kisses by the new HOA board member(s).

LOL - Or dancing with your leg as a show of friendship, solidarity or trying to curry favor.

[silversaver]

Silver - It just occurred to be that you may have never heard the very old saying I used about liking dogs more that people, and are thus perhaps unaware of my unintended use of the phrase as a sarcastic aphorism. My apologies.

Perhaps I took it in the wrong way.

[Rdjntx]

I don't really agree with a lot of your characterizations in your first paragraph, but then I have zero experience in Kalifornia HOAs, but the rest of it is spot on.

I see behavior of the type you describe quite often. I, and my libertarian inclinations and sensibilities certainly do not defend them. Saner thinkers hold most of it in check behind the scenes. My observation is that some folks on HOA Boards are stuck in a parental power trip. Some. Some of the rest are bored all day while their spouses work. A lot of the rest are retired, and after working 8-12 hrs. most of their working lives, now have spare time and use some of it to get out of the cart and push some. In my experience, most members of HOA Boards are not closet nazis and would rather not rock the boat, if only out of laziness. So I guess part of the difference in the way we see these issues is what percentage of Board servers are stand up and how many are butt holes. I've seen more stand up than National Socialism.

Before closing escrow, folks who buy property in an HOA are, by CA law anyway, given a set of By-Laws, CC& R's and other governing documents. If they do not like the conditions, they are not forced to buy. No one has a gun to their head. Why did they buy in the first place ? Caveat Emptor.

No one likes imposed restrictions that they feel do not apply to them - incorrectly or not. Most everyone likes restrictions that are felt to improve property values and quality of life - but what they feel restricts them affects neither of those things, good or bad, of course. Restrictions on raising livestock on 1/4 acre lots, junk cars in front yards, playgrounds that amount to amusement parks, and 8 ft. high solid fences around a front yard come to mind as actual examples.

I've observed, perhaps incorrectly, that most of the time, those who feel the most restricted by HOA's seem the least informed about what they signed on to HOA-wise, and are the most reluctant to get involved or work out a solution, often leaving Boards little choice.

There's usually two sides to a story. Reasonable people can usually get to workable, tolerable solutions. Failing that, there is always binding arbitration. Beyond that, there's adjudication through the court system with the loser picking up the tab.

Being on a Board is another reason why the more I deal with people, the more I like dogs, but I think the solar energy systems around here may be more numerous, and may be just a bit better designed as a result of my efforts at education and sane compromise on all sides, including some Board servers who think solar energy is a left wing plot.

Still not as cost effective as conservation however.

[J.P.M.]

I don't really agree with a lot of your characterizations in your first paragraph, but then I have zero experience in Kalifornia HOAs, but the rest of it is spot on.

Thank you for the honest feedback.

[J.P.M.]

Perhaps I took it in the wrong way.

No big deal. I do the same all the time.

I'd prefer to get back to what the sign over the door says: Solar Panel Talk, if that's OK with everyone.

Thanx for the input.

J.P.M.

[shocknocka]

Quite Off Topic we Are.

I spoke to my neighbor and unfortunately a lot of assumptions made here were not correct. The homeowners had no idea what the difference was and there system was installed before it was approved by there HOA. There were not extra modules installed to cover their bill. Even if the array was facing 180 at latitude, im not sure it would have zeroed it out. The Poor Family simply got had. I left my Name and number with them and offered to do a free QC once a few months have gone by. The whole HOA discussion is kinda besides the point. The array is on the front of the house and would have been much less visible from the south facing roof. Unfortunately the given room on the south side wouldn't allow for even a quarter of the array that was installed. I am sure they will have next to no production between october and march. Any way. Just thought I'd update everyone and remind you what the discussion is about.

[Rdjntx]

Wow that really sucks. My installer initially suggested a system about half the size of the one I wound up with because of the size of my south facing roof. When I talked to him about a bigger array (I wanted ot take full advantage of available rebates and ger more of my bill covered), he said I could get a bigger one but I would need to use my west facing roof. so that is what I opted for. I have two arrays, one south one west and couldn't be happiers with my system.

I am far from an expert but I think I would have opted to put what I could on the south side anyway. what does the east and west side of his roof look like? could they have put any of the array there?

I spoke to my neighbor and unfortunately a lot of assumptions made here were not correct. The homeowners had no idea what the difference was and there system was installed before it was approved by there HOA. There were not extra modules installed to cover their bill. Even if the array was facing 180 at latitude, im not sure it would have zeroed it out. The Poor Family simply got had. I left my Name and number with them and offered to do a free QC once a few months have gone by. The whole HOA discussion is kinda besides the point. The array is on the front of the house and would have been much less visible from the south facing roof. Unfortunately the given room on the south side wouldn't allow for even a quarter of the array that was installed. I am sure they will have next to no production between october and march. Any way. Just thought I'd update everyone and remind you what the discussion is about.

[njguy]

Since you ask for opinion(s), take what you want, leave the rest:

Solar is usually the least cost effective way to reduce an electric bill, but, against a lot of sound logic and common sense, also usually the first thing done - treating the symptom (a large electric bill) and not the disease (profligate energy use). Sort of like a morbidly obese person buying food stamps to reduce their food bill because they're told the stamps cost less than the food they buy. So they buy the stamps and eat the same or more for the same or slightly lower food bill. Same w/ solar electric - except in this case, the long term cost of the solar electricity (food stamps) is more than the long term cost of the POCO supplied electricity (food).

So when you say "least cost effective way" why? I get what you are saying about reducing energy use. What about a scenario where you have a couple of PHEV's and you use electric to charge them. I am looking into solar simply because buying and electric vehicle is great but you, in a sense, are filling it each day with coal fuel (or nuclear) as opposed to oil fuel (gasoline). Don't know if one is better than the other for the environment but solar and wind power do seem to be cleaner energy options.

Everything they tell you is that you are paying up front for a payback between 5 to 7 years (with NJ SRECs). I do think that is the case based on numbers I've run. The question is, can I keep that $14K in an investment account and earn enough to offset what I save over the 20 or so years I have the 6.5w system. Thanks for helping me learn more about this.

[shocknocka]

something im curious about

This topic has got me thinking and I would like to know if anyone has an azimuth derate formula. Lets say you take an array and install it in an area with zero obstructions between 60 and 300 degrees azimuth. Lets say it was installed with the tilt being at latitude. Does any one have a formula for how much or how little of an effect on yearly production moving that array to the east or west by a certain increments would make?

[J.P.M.]

So when you say "least cost effective way" why? I get what you are saying about reducing energy use. What about a scenario where you have a couple of PHEV's and you use electric to charge them. I am looking into solar simply because buying and electric vehicle is great but you, in a sense, are filling it each day with coal fuel (or nuclear) as opposed to oil fuel (gasoline). Don't know if one is better than the other for the environment but solar and wind power do seem to be cleaner energy options.

Everything they tell you is that you are paying up front for a payback between 5 to 7 years (with NJ SRECs). I do think that is the case based on numbers I've run. The question is, can I keep that $14K in an investment account and earn enough to offset what I save over the 20 or so years I have the 6.5w system. Thanks for helping me learn more about this.

Assuming for a minute that this is a conversation about reducing an electric bill, not providing solar electric for its own sake:

1.) For residential use, solar is almost always the least cost effective because almost anything else a homeowner can do to save a kWhr. of electricity for domestic use is almost always less expensive than providing that same kWhr. of electricity with solar energy. It's cheaper to save a kWhr. with insulation or a low flow shower heads, etc. than solar panels. Added to that, any solar electric added after conservation is maxed out will be smaller as a result of all the conservation efforts as a bonus of sorts. This is something the solar peddlers do not talk about. They make money putting solar electric equipment on your house, not saving you money. That's your job.
No offense meant, but you could probably have the $20 or so cost of a book called "Solar Energy For Dummies" back 100 fold or more in oversizing and other mistakes you'd avoid by spending a couple hours perusing its pages.

As a grossly oversimplified example for illustration purposes only, and realizing NJ is not CA:

2.) The costs for a new, EV: Assuming 12,000 miles/yr. and, say, 3 miles/kWhr. for "mileage" = 4,000 kWhrs./yr. required. In my neighborhood, a pretty decent solar climate, each Kw of installed solar will produce something like 1,600kWhrs./yr. of electricity to recharge the vehicle. The 4,000 kWhrs will thus require a 2.5 kW solar electric system. At the approx. going rate around here of , say $3.50/Watt less 30% tax credit, that's $6,125.00 after tax credits. Systems that small cost more /Watt, but like I wrote, this is an illustration only.

Initially assuming the EV is not purchased out of necessity (if it was you'd likely have to buy two new vehicles - one EV for local, and one ICE for intercity/long distance.), it's cost and the cost of the charging equipment, less a trade in vehicle are added to the solar electric system.

I have no idea what EV's actually cost, but assuming it's not a $100K Tesla, I'll use 25K plus tax, net, including a charger and after old vehicle trade in and after $7,500 tax credit.

So, vehicle and equipment acquisition costs ~~ $25,000 + $6,125 = $31,125.

3.) This needs to be offset against the avoided ICE fuel and ICE associated maint. costs. Back to the back of the envelope: drive 12,000 miles a yr. in an ICE vehicle that gets 30 MPG = 400 gal./yr. @$4.00/gal. = ~ $1,600/yr. Throw in 2.5 oil changes at $50/pop and $250/yr. for stuff the ICE needs that an electric vehicle does not. Total = $1,975.00/yr., say $2K SWAG.

Given those #'s, I'll be driving the EV a long time before I can justify its cost on the basis of fuel savings alone.

Now, before anyone goes after my head, rips it off and craps down my neck, I understand not everyone would include the vehicle cost in the calcs. And I'd be and am the first to agree that some situations do not require and should not include vehicle cost. If my car is about to die or is in a wreck, then adjustments can and should be made. I have also not included any trade in of the E.V. However, I'd suggest that unless the situation is such that a new vehicle was NEEDED, rather than an E.V. WANTED, The vehicle acquisition cost or some portion of it should be included in the calculation. The slippery slope is in separating WANT, from NEED. That's a personal choice. I once had a job with a co. car. I pitched for a Buick as it helped my and the co.'s image. I got a Chevy. My opinion vs. my boss and the cost accountants. Opinions vary.

As for an E.V. with no solar, most of the savings in fuel cost comes from the usually smaller E.V. size to begin with, making it easier to push down the road. Otherwise, most of the savings, in energy anyway, come from the much greater efficiency of electric motors (~ 55-60% ) as opposed to ICE ( ~ 20% +/- a bit depending). An E.V. might get 3 miles/kWkr. Buying at E.V. rates from my POCO, ~$.17/kWhr. -->> ~ $.17/3 = $.057/mile, +/- some. My 30 MPG ICE above has a simple fuel cost of $.133/mile. So the FUEL savings amount to $.133-$.057 = $.076/mile or 12,000 X $.076 = $912.00/yr. Assuming a NEEDED new vehicle, the Net Present Value (NPV) of the $912 is how much more one can spend on an E.V. vs. and ICE fueled vehicle and justify the extra cost, or call savings.

More back of the envelope and maybe an interesting factoid: 1 gal. of gas has about 33 kWhrs. of energy making its cost about $.121/kWhr. at $4.00/gal. - less than the cost of POCO off peak power in my example.

BTW, If I charge at $.37/kWhr. peak rate (Don't do this at home kids) the E.V. $/mile rate goes to $.37/3 = $.123/mile, sort of close to the ICE rate.

As for cleaner energy options, they may be. However, the hype and emotion fueled half or less truths that are often no more than parroted verbal spoor originating at the extremes of both sides do not make the waters less muddy and are, IMO, less than helpful at getting to solutions.

As for what to do with $14K, that's a problem in something called life cycle costing, or comparison of alternatives. That amounts to in effect, making assumptions about the future directions of inflation, fuel costs, how long a time frame, alternative rates of return, the time value of money and as much other stuff as you deem pertinent. It's usually more than finding an investment that will return more than $14,000/6 yrs. = $2,333/yr.

[silversaver]

So part of my job at the company I currently work for is to do shade analysis and design the layout of arrays to maximize production for the customer. In other words, part of my job is conducting site surveys. Recently, on my way home from work I noticed an array that one of my nieghbors had installed that was facing at about a 345-355 degree azimuth. I could tell from looking that the roof pitch was about a 5/12. They had 31 panels and since i could not spot an inverter im assuming there were either micros or power optimizers of some sort utilized. From what I have experienced at this point in the solar field, as much as solar has come down in the last few year, it is still not practical to put panels flush with a rooftop facing between 290-85 degrees. The return on investment is just not there yet. Please share your opinions. Also, what would you do if this was your neighbor. I come across a lot of ppl who do not understand solar and it seems like many companies are taking advantage of this. As a NABCEP Certified instillation profesional and an individual passionate about his carreer, this makes me very upset.

This topic has got me thinking and I would like to know if anyone has an azimuth derate formula. Lets say you take an array and install it in an area with zero obstructions between 60 and 300 degrees azimuth. Lets say it was installed with the tilt being at latitude. Does any one have a formula for how much or how little of an effect on yearly production moving that array to the east or west by a certain increments would make?

Are you new to business?

[silversaver]

Assuming for a minute that this is a conversation about reducing an electric bill, not providing solar electric for its own sake:

1.) For residential use, solar is almost always the least cost effective because almost anything else a homeowner can do to save a kWhr. of electricity for domestic use is almost always less expensive than providing that same kWhr. of electricity with solar energy. It's cheaper to save a kWhr. with insulation or a low flow shower heads, etc. than solar panels. Added to that, any solar electric added after conservation is maxed out will be smaller as a result of all the conservation efforts as a bonus of sorts. This is something the solar peddlers do not talk about. They make money putting solar electric equipment on your house, not saving you money. That's your job.
No offense meant, but you could probably have the $20 or so cost of a book called "Solar Energy For Dummies" back 100 fold or more in oversizing and other mistakes you'd avoid by spending a couple hours perusing its pages.

As a grossly oversimplified example for illustration purposes only, and realizing NJ is not CA:

2.) The costs for a new, EV: Assuming 12,000 miles/yr. and, say, 3 miles/kWhr. for "mileage" = 4,000 kWhrs./yr. required. In my neighborhood, a pretty decent solar climate, each Kw of installed solar will produce something like 1,600kWhrs./yr. of electricity to recharge the vehicle. The 4,000 kWhrs will thus require a 2.5 kW solar electric system. At the approx. going rate around here of , say $3.50/Watt less 30% tax credit, that's $6,125.00 after tax credits. Systems that small cost more /Watt, but like I wrote, this is an illustration only.

Initially assuming the EV is not purchased out of necessity (if it was you'd likely have to buy two new vehicles - one EV for local, and one ICE for intercity/long distance.), it's cost and the cost of the charging equipment, less a trade in vehicle are added to the solar electric system.

I have no idea what EV's actually cost, but assuming it's not a $100K Tesla, I'll use 25K plus tax, net, including a charger and after old vehicle trade in and after $7,500 tax credit.

So, vehicle and equipment acquisition costs ~~ $25,000 + $6,125 = $31,125.

3.) This needs to be offset against the avoided ICE fuel and ICE associated maint. costs. Back to the back of the envelope: drive 12,000 miles a yr. in an ICE vehicle that gets 30 MPG = 400 gal./yr. @$4.00/gal. = ~ $1,600/yr. Throw in 2.5 oil changes at $50/pop and $250/yr. for stuff the ICE needs that an electric vehicle does not. Total = $1,975.00/yr., say $2K SWAG.

Given those #'s, I'll be driving the EV a long time before I can justify its cost on the basis of fuel savings alone.

Now, before anyone goes after my head, rips it off and craps down my neck, I understand not everyone would include the vehicle cost in the calcs. And I'd be and am the first to agree that some situations do not require and should not include vehicle cost. If my car is about to die or is in a wreck, then adjustments can and should be made. I have also not included any trade in of the E.V. However, I'd suggest that unless the situation is such that a new vehicle was NEEDED, rather than an E.V. WANTED, The vehicle acquisition cost or some portion of it should be included in the calculation. The slippery slope is in separating WANT, from NEED. That's a personal choice. I once had a job with a co. car. I pitched for a Buick as it helped my and the co.'s image. I got a Chevy. My opinion vs. my boss and the cost accountants. Opinions vary.

As for an E.V. with no solar, most of the savings in fuel cost comes from the usually smaller E.V. size to begin with, making it easier to push down the road. Otherwise, most of the savings, in energy anyway, come from the much greater efficiency of electric motors (~ 55-60% ) as opposed to ICE ( ~ 20% +/- a bit depending). An E.V. might get 3 miles/kWkr. Buying at E.V. rates from my POCO, ~$.17/kWhr. -->> ~ $.17/3 = $.057/mile, +/- some. My 30 MPG ICE above has a simple fuel cost of $.133/mile. So the FUEL savings amount to $.133-$.057 = $.076/mile or 12,000 X $.076 = $912.00/yr. Assuming a NEEDED new vehicle, the Net Present Value (NPV) of the $912 s how much more one can spend on an E.V. vs. and ICE fueled vehicle and justify the extra cost, or call savings.

More back of the envelope and maybe an interesting factoid: 1 gal. of gas has about 33 kWhrs. of energy making its cost about $.121/kWhr. at $4.00/gal. - less than the cost of POCO off peak power in my example.

BTW, If I charge at $.37/kWhr. peak rate (Don't do this at home kids) the E.V. $/mile rate goes to $.37/3 = $.123/mile, sort of close to the ICE rate.

As for cleaner energy options, they may be. However, the hype and emotion fueled half or less truths that are often no more than parroted verbal spoor originating at the extremes of both sides do not make the waters less muddy and are, IMO, less than helpful at getting to solutions.

As for what to do with $14K, that's a problem in something called life cycle costing, or comparison of alternatives. That amounts to in effect, making assumptions about the future directions of inflation, fuel costs, how long a time frame, alternative rates of return, the time value of money and as much other stuff as you deem pertinent. It's usually more than finding an investment that will return more than $14,000/6 yrs. = $2,333/yr.

Great analysis! There's alway great deal on EVs. With State rebate $2500, you can get a Smart Electric as low as $100 per month $0 down.