Solaredge P400 or P300 optimizers?

[reader2580]

Also - since you're building a larger system
And you're looking to make it be ground mount.
I would seriously look at a normal string inverter.
Solaredge is great - I have one myself. But for a ground mount I think the payback is likely to favor a string inverter.
Usually ground mounts don't have multiple angles and numerous partial shading issues (like from 2nd floor shading modules on the roof of a first floor)

I just reread the 2014 NEC again. My interpretation is that I will need rapid shutdown because inverter will be in garage. This adds $250 or more to inverter cost.

I see 10,000 watt string inverters are all around $2,800 on Renvu.com. Am I missing a less expensive option for a string inverter?

[ButchDeal]

I just reread the 2014 NEC again. My interpretation is that I will need rapid shutdown because inverter will be in garage. This adds $250 or more to inverter cost.

I see 10,000 watt string inverters are all around $2,800 on Renvu.com. Am I missing a less expensive option for a string inverter?

I thought you were going with SolarEdge? It is built in with SolarEdge.
it will cost more than $250 for non-SolarEdge inverters.

[foo1bar]

I just reread the 2014 NEC again. My interpretation is that I will need rapid shutdown because inverter will be in garage. This adds $250 or more to inverter cost.

I see 10,000 watt string inverters are all around $2,800 on Renvu.com. Am I missing a less expensive option for a string inverter?

So what's the comparison?
$3.1k for string inverter with rapid shutdown.
vs
$3.7k for solaredge system.
?

If so, if it were me, I might still go with solaredge - especially if there's a little shading.

I needed to use solaredge because of shading and orientation. And it was 1.5 years ago. So I didn't pay much attention to rapid shutdown requirements.

[foo1bar]

My total electric bill for a year with solar access fees will be $936. A 6 KW system would generate $1038 in electricity per PVWATTS. Payback would probably be 7 years or so at current electric rates. If I did 10 KW I could pay off the system in five years and make money after that as long as net metering is in effect.

Are you sure of your analysis and your understanding of how net metering works where you live?

Where I live I get retail rates for the kwh I generate which are applied to the kwh that I consume.
If I generate more than I consume I get paid only the wholesale rate.
So to pay the $5 monthly fee I would need to generate an excess 1500kwh at ~$.04/kwh.
And that means it is a much longer payback than where I'm getting "paid" $.11/kwh because it's going against electric usage.

Net metering laws and poco policies differ from place to place.
So maybe you are right for your poco.
BUT I recommend you make sure before you spend an extra $6000 (or whatever) that you would have been far better off sticking into a CD earning only 1.5%

[reader2580]

have talked to the power company a number of times. I have verified they send a check every year for excess production at retail rates.

The difference between 6,000 watts and 10,000 watts is $3,000 to $4,000 before the 30% credit. The electric cooperatives in Minnesota have made it 100% clear that they only want to pay wholesale rates down the road and would do it today if they could. I think it prudent to be prepared for when I only get paid wholesale rates so hopefully I can generate enough to offset the power I have to buy at retail rates. Five or ten years down the road who knows if I could really add 4,000 more watts for well less than $1 a watt. Tax credits will be gone by then.

I am looking at string inverters only because they are being recommended to save money because I have no shading.

[foo1bar]

The electric cooperatives in Minnesota

since you're in Minnesota, you should look into the Minnesota incentive for Minnesota-made panels. (At least there was one ~2 years ago)

[solar pete]

Howdy Peeps, if you want to know whats going on in Minnesota check out this link for solar related incentives and programs

http://programs.dsireusa.org/system/program?zipcode=55105

[reader2580]

Yes, I am in Minnesota, but all of the Minnesota incentives apply only to electric customers of Xcel energy. I get my electricity from an electric cooperative and there are no incentives available. I forgot that Minnesota does exempt solar energy systems from sales tax so I do qualify for that.

Great River Energy sells wholesale electricity to most of the electric cooperatives in the state. Great River Energy has statements on their website indicating they would greatly limit distributed solar if they could. Electric cooperatives in the state are trying to limit solar by charging fees to hook a solar system to the grid. One charges $83 a month to have solar!

[solar pete]

WOW, 83 bucks a month to have solar, what a rip off,

[SWFLA]

Yes, I am in Minnesota, but all of the Minnesota incentives apply only to electric customers of Xcel energy. I get my electricity from an electric cooperative and there are no incentives available. I forgot that Minnesota does exempt solar energy systems from sales tax so I do qualify for that.

Great River Energy sells wholesale electricity to most of the electric cooperatives in the state. Great River Energy has statements on their website indicating they would greatly limit distributed solar if they could. Electric cooperatives in the state are trying to limit solar by charging fees to hook a solar system to the grid. One charges $83 a month to have solar!

I got hit for a one time fee of $35

[J.P.M.]

WOW, 83 bucks a month to have solar, what a rip off,

FWIW, and like most things, how much of a rip of it may be depends on where the view is taken. Not taking sides here, but that view may well be similar to how the POCO views $83 of what they consider lost revenue from a residential PV system.

[reader2580]

The electric cooperative that charges $83 a month for solar only has 4,200 customers with an average of 4.2 customers per line. Some of the cooperatives in the state charge $80 a month for the basic monthly fee! This is due to long distances power lines run and lots of seasonal customers. $80 a month is more than my monthly electric bill.

The state legislature passed legislation allowing cooperative customers to appeal the solar fees to the state PUC, There are several such cases pending. The cooperatives went to the state legislature to get a bill in process that removes cooperatives from state regulation and terminates all pending cases with the state PUC. Cooperatives would be regulated by their board of directors. Someone could appeal the solar fee to the board of directors, but that won't change anything since the board set the fee.

[reader2580]

FWIW, and like most things, how much of a rip of it may be depends on where the view is taken. Not taking sides here, but that view may well be similar to how the POCO views $83 of what they consider lost revenue from a residential PV system.

Cooperatives in Minnesota are non-profit. They pay about 7.6 cents a KWh for wholesale power and sell it for retail rates that are generally 11 cents per KWh or higher. Their argument for the solar fee is that part of the 3 to 4 cents they get per KWh pays for the grid.

Some are asking if they are also going to charge a fee for going to LED light bulbs and other energy savings since that reduces electricity use too.

[J.P.M.]

Cooperatives in Minnesota are non-profit. They pay about 7.6 cents a KWh for wholesale power and sell it for retail rates that are generally 11 cents per KWh or higher. Their argument for the solar fee is that part of the 3 to 4 cents they get per KWh pays for the grid.

Some are asking if they are also going to charge a fee for going to LED light bulbs and other energy savings since that reduces electricity use too.

Someone needs to pay for the grid infrastructure and its maintenance. Usually and historically, that's come from the sale of electricity. Without that, or with shortfalls, or extraordinary expenses, or poor management, or all of the above and more, how that's done with a regulated utility often results in bizarre revenue schemes. I suppose some could also float the idea of taxing sunshine as one way along with taxing LED bulb purchases.

[SunEagle]

Someone needs to pay for the grid infrastructure and its maintenance. Usually and historically, that's come from the sale of electricity. Without that, or with shortfalls, or extraordinary expenses, or poor management, or all of the above and more, how that's done with a regulated utility often results in bizarre revenue schemes. I suppose some could also float the idea of taxing sunshine as one way along with taxing LED bulb purchases.

As you know it still comes down to the investors expectations which is based on a calculated profit from X amount of kWh's sold. If that number of kWh goes down then the profit margin suffers.

Also you have to figure in unexpected costs of maintaining the grid which can eat into the profits if the repairs/upgrades were not properly budgeted.

Most POCO's are businesses which as expected want to make a profit and reward their investors. No or Low profit usually leads to less investors.

I expect more POCO's or Co-ops to start asking for permission to either raise the rates or bill a certain portion of their customers that are not purchasing as much as they had estimated.

It happened to me with our water company did not get the expected income due to volunteer reduction of usage because of drought conditions. What I did not like was the increase covered not only the requirements to keep the "pipes" working but also allowed for a higher profit.

PIA but what can you do. If you want clean healthy water you pay the piper.