Which Panels/System for a DIY install?

[activemind]

I'm in California. From what I've read there are no restrictions for a DIY install other than permits and inspections. The GoGreenSolar that I mentioned says that they will take you through the entire process. I just don't know anything about their panels. I want to make sure that the company that manufactures the panels/etc. that I buy will be around in 10-20 years. I guess that's not guaranteed with anyone, but it'd wouldn't worry so much if it were someone like SunPower or LG.

I have first hand experience with GGS and have been very happy with them, They will sell pretty much any config you want but but they primarily deal with Gigawatt panels.

I bought LG320/Solaredge7600 system from them and had it installed but someone they recommended.

I dont have anything except good things to say about GGS. They are very responsive via email and phone and will walk you through the whole process and yes, I mean everything from permitting till PTO.

Now the contractor they found is whole another story. They apologized to me multiple times about picking him and promised to drop him for future work.

But yeah, if you can find someone to do the install for you and work with GGS for permit, it is a turnkey solution.

Final price is good 10% cheaper than other places.

Disclaimer: I have no vested interest in GGS, just a happy customer.

[silversaver]

I have first hand experience with GGS and have been very happy with them, They will sell pretty much any config you want but but they primarily deal with Gigawatt panels.

I bought LG320/Solaredge7600 system from them and had it installed but someone they recommended.

I dont have anything except good things to say about GGS. They are very responsive via email and phone and will walk you through the whole process and yes, I mean everything from permitting till PTO.

Now the contractor they found is whole another story. They apologized to me multiple times about picking him and promised to drop him for future work.

But yeah, if you can find someone to do the install for you and work with GGS for permit, it is a turnkey solution.

Final price is good 10% cheaper than other places.

Disclaimer: I have no vested interest in GGS, just a happy customer.

Not trying to throwing anyone under the bus, but gogreensolar is one of the first few companies I talk to in 2013 when inquiring about solar. They referring me to an installer and initial contact is really professional + they are the few installer actually go up to the roof before giving out estimate.

BUT, the solar layout on roof were totally off!! Price per Watt were almost $5.

Not my cup of tea

[activemind]

Not trying to throwing anyone under the bus, but gogreensolar is one of the first few companies I talk to in 2013 when inquiring about solar. They referring me to an installer and initial contact is really professional + they are the few installer actually go up to the roof before giving out estimate.

BUT, the solar layout on roof were totally off!! Price per Watt were almost $5.

Not my cup of tea

Possibe

My final install price was $3.38/Watt before rebate. Break even period is ~6 years for me.

-AM

[brandon515]

Just an update. My quote from gogreensolar comes out to $2.03 per watt before rebate, so if I pay for someone to install it based on an install price of $1 per watt then my price installed would be $3 per watt. Is that better or about the same as most solar companies charge?

[sdold]

Well, it's not a hell of a lot less. I think you're better off having someone do the whole thing using whatever they routinely install. That way they will be efficient, less likely to make mistakes, and responsible for everything.

[sensij]

Just an update. My quote from gogreensolar comes out to $2.03 per watt before rebate, so if I pay for someone to install it based on an install price of $1 per watt then my price installed would be $3 per watt. Is that better or about the same as most solar companies charge?

That seems high for only equipment. How big? Try getting a quote from Tandem Solar. I am about to finish a DIY 8 kW system for $1.35/W.

[sdold]

I actually thought that price didn't sound too bad, IIRC that particular company works up the engineering drawings and gives a lot of guidance along the way, It might be worth it for the support, if the support is any good. When I did my DIY I must have spent ten hours or more just figuring out the load calcs in the ASCE book. It probably took me two or three hours just figuring out the pull strength of the mounting screws.

[sensij]

I actually thought that price didn't sound too bad, IIRC that particular company works up the engineering drawings and gives a lot of guidance along the way, It might be worth it for the support, if the support is any good. When I did my DIY I must have spent ten hours or more just figuring out the load calcs in the ASCE book. It probably took me two or three hours just figuring out the pull strength of the mounting screws.

If that level of engineering support is required, sure. At this point CA has released guidance on standard plans that don't require custom engineering, so if the roof construction meets the conditions for using the template, commercial mounting systems can be installed with no additional analysis.

Software programs are available to do all the electrical calcs, but a set of plans from a PE only costs around $300, so even that level of knowledge is no longer required.

[SunEagle]

If that level of engineering support is required, sure. At this point CA has released guidance on standard plans that don't require custom engineering, so if the roof construction meets the conditions for using the template, commercial mounting systems can be installed with no additional analysis.

Software programs are available to do all the electrical calcs, but a set of plans from a PE only costs around $300, so even that level of knowledge is no longer required.

Sounds like CA is either getting lax in their engineering design requirements or is starting to get desperate to have more people install solar.

At one time CA had the highest standard for the PE test where even if you had a license from another State the CA board would not recognize it as being enough to be qualified for their State codes.

[J.P.M.]

At one time CA had the highest standard for the PE test where even if you had a license from another State the CA board would not recognize it as being enough to be qualified for their State codes.

If I recall correctly (??), when I took the PE exam (principles & practice, the 2d part ) the test was identical for all states. The difference for candidates looking for Mech. Eng. licensure in CA was that those folks needed to do the afternoon session problem dealing with seismic design. Fortunately for me, and as luck would have it, being somewhat familiar with that sub-discipline from having done a fair amount of such stuff as an EIT, I did that problem as one of my choices. When I took both parts, the exam(s) - both parts - was the same for most states (I think), but different states sometimes had somewhat different requirements for the 2d part. NY for example, at that time, required that candidates taking the 2d part do the engineering economic analysis as one of their problem choices for the test to be acceptable for licensure requirements in that state.

[SunEagle]

If I recall correctly (??), when I took the PE exam (principles & practice, the 2d part ) the test was identical for all states. The difference for candidates looking for Mech. Eng. licensure in CA was that those folks needed to do the afternoon session problem dealing with seismic design. Fortunately for me, and as luck would have it, being somewhat familiar with that sub-discipline from having done a fair amount of such stuff as an EIT, I did that problem as one of my choices. When I took both parts, the exam(s) - both parts - was the same for most states (I think), but different states sometimes had somewhat different requirements for the 2d part. NY for example, at that time, required that candidates taking the 2d part do the engineering economic analysis as one of their problem choices for the test to be acceptable for licensure requirements in that state.

Things may have changed. Back in the early 80's I worked with a couple of PE's (one from NJ the other from Kentucky). They were told that could not sign off on a CA project since their licenses were considered inadequate for CA's standard. Now if they had a PE license from NY it would have been accepted but at that time CA and NY would not immediately recognize a PE from another state without first going through a flaming hoop. From what I heard you would be in deep do-do if you had a PE from say Mississippi or Wyoming. Maybe that has changed.

[sensij]

Sounds like CA is either getting lax in their engineering design requirements or is starting to get desperate to have more people install solar.

Maybe, but I think it is more likely that people recognized that most house construction is similar enough that a well engineered system can be used with small tweaks most of the time. Why require every single installation to produce a fresh set of calculations, when the results will be about the same most of the time?

[SunEagle]

Maybe, but I think it is more likely that people recognized that most house construction is similar enough that a well engineered system can be used with small tweaks most of the time. Why require every single installation to produce a fresh set of calculations, when the results will be about the same most of the time?

Makes sense to me. Whatever works to expedite the process and get more solar onto roofs.

[J.P.M.]

Things may have changed. Back in the early 80's I worked with a couple of PE's (one from NJ the other from Kentucky). They were told that could not sign off on a CA project since their licenses were considered inadequate for CA's standard. Now if they had a PE license from NY it would have been accepted but at that time CA and NY would not immediately recognize a PE from another state without first going through a flaming hoop. From what I heard you would be in deep do-do if you had a PE from say Mississippi or Wyoming. Maybe that has changed.

Since I only had to jump through the NY to CA hoop, I'm unfamiliar with other combinations/permutations of cross state licensure, but my understanding at that time was that while the exam(s) were pretty much standardized throughout the U.S., individual states could accept the exam(s) or not, or stipulate which parts they would accept or require as part of their licensure requirements. The bigger hurdle however was still, and often, what constituted acceptable and qualifying experience. Depending on the actual nature of the project work, cross state licensure may or may not have been required. As I recall, most, but not all states had reasonable reciprocity agreements for the same disciplines, with TX, as I seem to recall, being an exception to that for some reason, at least for M.E.'s. That reciprocity still required filing for and obtaining a license in the state where the work was sited, which may or may not have required additional submittals describing, for example, relevant and (additional ?) qualifying work experience.

Today, the NSPE ( National Society of Professional Engineers) has a process called the Council Records Program that they claim will cut some of the B.S. out of the process. See their website and look for "comity".

Add: Sunking, or other current/retired P.E''s, can you help me (or at least my memory) out here a bit out ?

[foo1bar]

Sounds like CA is either getting lax in their engineering design requirements or is starting to get desperate to have more people install solar.

I think they're recognizing that if you don't need detailed engineering design for a typical residential roof you don't need one for a typical solar module install.
Sure you need some guidelines to make sure it's conservative enough that it's safe even without the detailed engineering. Just like you have guidelines for rafters and roof sheathing.

My city/AHJ required attachment points to the rafters every 4' if you wanted to use the expedited approval process.
And I think there was some requirement on the rafters being certain dimensions/spacing.
If I had wanted to use a longer span (which my ironridge rails would have supported) - I would have had to provide proof in the form of engineering calcs.
But rather than do that, I went with a few more attachment points and not having to do the engineering calcs. (I did do a little looking - just for fun - and there was plenty of safety margin in all directions - downward force from weight (or weight + wind or weight + wind+ snow), upward force from wind uplift, and sideways force.)

Will it survive a tornado? No.
But even with engineering calcs it wouldn't (most likely it'd have been built with fewer attachment points and be even less likely to survive extreme/unusual winds)