Price paid per watt

[bcroe]

Getting a quote for 104,423 for a 19,890 KW system from Solar City ($5.25 per KW)

78 Trina Solar 255PD05.18 panels Any thoughts on this?

With 78 panels, I'm going to guess you really mean

"$104,423 for a 19.89 KW system from Solar City ($5,250 per KW)"

[bam_bam]

one vendor

One vendor ? Same as AlisoBob ?

Yes one vendor not the same as alisobob.

[J.P.M.]

Yes one vendor not the same as alisobob.

Thank you.

[araghava]

3$/W pre tax, San Francisco.
3.6 Kw system
Renesola Panels
SolarEdge Inverter

[venvis2001]

Hi araghava,
can you PM me the name of your installer? Couple of my friends are asking for installers. Since I did it DIY, I thought of asking Forum members.

[Carl_NH]

3$/Kw pre tax, San Francisco.
3.6 Kw system
Renesola Panels
SolarEdge Inverter

Araghava.

Great job on your system, with investigation, vendor selection and price too - I think you meant $3.00 per Watt.

As posted before (a fellow from Scotland) the electrician based company provided the best value/$ versus buying from a "solar company" specializing in the field.

[araghava]

Araghava.

Great job on your system, with investigation, vendor selection and price too - I think you meant $3.00 per Watt.

As posted before (a fellow from Scotland) the electrician based company provided the best value/$ versus buying from a "solar company" specializing in the field.

Yes, thanks for catching that. I edited my original post.

[wshepherd]

Follow up question

I paid $4.23 before incentives ($2.25 after) for the following 7.8kW system installed including cost of trenching 100' and under a driveway. The install location is in Connecticut.

(24) SunPower 327 panels
SMA SB7000TL-22 with SPS Outlet.

Roof installed on detached barn

Would you mind sharing who your installer was?

[wshepherd]

With 78 panels, I'm going to guess you really mean

"$104,423 for a 19.89 KW system from Solar City ($5,250 per KW)"

yes

[sms]

$4.70/watt before tax incentives. $3.09/watt after rebates and tax incentives. Silicon Valley, CA. PG&E. Paying 33¢/KWH in third and fourth tiers.

Sixteen 345 watt Sunpower panels (5520 watts)
No optimizers.
Sunnyboy Inverter.
Concrete Tile Roof.

This includes the cost of replacing the old 100 amp Zinsco electrical panel with a 200 amp panel. That is valued separately at $2000 (based on independent quotes I have received, and that's how much they are charging for it as well). Subtracting the panel cost, it's $4.34 and $2.73 per watt.

Because of limited optimal facing roof space I needed to use the more expensive, more efficient, Sunpower panels. I got four quotes. Two used inferior panels. One used panels from a company that is in some financial trouble (and even though those panels are monocrystalline they are not very efficient) and I was hesitant to go with them. Some of the proposals from the companies using sub-300 watt panels were almost comical--there were panels scattered everywhere on the roof just to get up to 5000-6000 watts.

It's not installed yet and I still have time to cancel if something better comes up.

I got estimates from Sunrun, Peterson-Dean, Sunpower, and Solar City. Sunrun's panels were too low wattage. Peterson-Dean uses Solar World panels and I was uneasy about the prospects for Solar World. Solar City is essentially selling financing and they really only want to do leases. Plus Petersen Dean is doing infomercials now and that makes me leery.

So this is what I've learned so far after talking to multiple salespeople (only one of which really knew very much).

1. Avoid micro-inverters if a) you have a tile roof, or b) you live in a hot area. Too many points of failure and you don't want people constantly on your roof replacing them (especially on a tile roof). If a central inverter fails it's an easy replacement.
2. Optimizers are not necessary unless you have shading issues or are really into monitoring each panel's production.
3. For residential use get monocrystalline panels. Avoid polycrystalline panels.
4. Don't buy panels that are less than 300 watts each. Some older-technology monocrystalline panels are low wattage, and nearly all polycrystalline panels are low wattage. Low wattage panel are fine for huge installations with lots of available area and the lower cost per watt makes sense in that situation.
5. Buy direct, from a panel manufacturer that is likely to remain in business, not from an independent solar installer that sells panels from that manufacturer. Also avoid companies that have latched onto solar as a sideline, i.e. replacement window companies, roofers, etc..
6. Minimize the number of panels buy using the more efficient panels even if the initial cost is slightly higher.
7. Buy, don't lease, and avoid "prepaid power agreements." Whatever they don't want to sell you is probably what you want to buy.
8. Ensure that the electrical panel upgrade cost, if necessary is included. If you do it as part of the installation you get the tax credit on the electrical panel.
9. After 2015 the 30% federal tax credit is being phased out over several years with declining percentages..
10. Check LinkedIn for friends that may work at a solar company to see if there is any "friend's and family" discount (the quote I got from Sunpower came down by $3000 because of a 60¢/KW credit, without that credit I probably would have not done solar at all).
11. Check that it makes sense at all based on your KWH rate. At PG&E's 33¢/KWH it makes sense for me. The next city over, Santa Clara, with a municipally owned power company, charges about 11¢/KWH and solar makes no sense.
12. Consider whether or not a time-of-use rate plan will work for you or not. For my utility, they credit you a lot more for generated power if you are on a time-of-use rate plan, so even if you have to use some peak time power, i.e. for a pool pump or air conditioner, it may be beneficial to be on the time-of use plan and pay a higher peak rate than on a non-time-of-use rate plan.
13. Avoid the one-year-same-as-cash offers if the company takes credit cards. A 2% credit card rebate (Citibank Double Cash) is a lot better than one year of free financing considering the nearly 0% interest rates banks are paying on savings.
14. The cheapest quote is usually not the best quote. Especially important to consider is what is going to happen to these smaller installers once the federal tax credit goes away. And what's going to happen to panel manufacturers in the U.S. once the anti-dumping penalties are reduced or eliminated.

[sensij]

These do look like lessons straight out of a solar salesman's book.

#4 is problematic, since paying more up front for higher wattage panels is definitely *not* a sure thing, and depends heavily on the price paid vs the how long the system is expected to be owned. Because the "payback" period (however you choose to define it) is usually longer for higher $ / W system, people who may not expect to live in their homes forever may be better off with the lower wattage system. Although a larger system may generate the most financial benefit over, say, 20 years, over 10 years that some use for their projections it is much less obvious.

#2 and 3 are offered without explanation. I think you'll find reasonable disagreement on the relative value of polycrystalline vs monocrystalline panels, and also the perceived value of SolarEdge even in non-shaded installations.

#11 Requires more research into the rate projections. You might not realize it, but even your $0.33 / kWh is likely to be decreasing over the next few years.

#9 is a mix of misinformation and complete speculation. The tax credit is in place through 2016. After 2016, no one knows what will happen.

#5 is kind of silly too. Installers with diverse revenue streams are more likely to be in business as market cycles for the different services they offer rise and fall.

#8 is false logic. Whether the service panel upgrade is bundled with the install or done by a pure electrician, the tax reporting is not affected either way. If it is part of the solar electric property, it doesn't matter whether the costs are on just one or the sum of many separate invoices.

[araghava]

I would also disagree with some of what sms says. I paid 3$/W in San Francisco. I did so by avoiding the Solar companies and going with a General Contractor. I bought large panels because they are cheaper than the more efficient smaller ones. This was not a problem for me because i have a large flat roof. My post tax cost is 2.1 $/W. There are certainly cons with my approach. I don't have a warranty but am willing to live without one.

[bcroe]

Because of limited optimal facing roof space I needed to use the more expensive, more efficient, Sunpower panels. I got four quotes. Two used inferior panels. One used panels from a company that is in some financial trouble (and even though those panels are monocrystalline they are not very efficient) and I was hesitant to go with them. Some of the proposals from the companies using sub-300 watt panels were almost comical--there were panels scattered everywhere on the roof just to get up to 5000-6000 watts.

4. Don't buy panels that are less than 300 watts each. Some older-technology monocrystalline panels are low wattage, and nearly all polycrystalline panels are low wattage. Low wattage panel are fine for huge installations with lots of available area and the lower cost per watt makes sense in that situation.


6. Minimize the number of panels b(u)y using the more efficient panels even if the
initial cost is slightly higher.

By 4., are you saying, use 72 cell panels? That is the same power output (per cell) as
the very common, almost as space efficient (and cheap) 250W 60 cell panel. Your roof
will determine which fits best. On the ground here the very generic 250s give me the
most W/$ and are a lot easier to handle (I have both sizes).

I don't see 6. at all.

Maybe your guidelines are intended just for rooftop installations? Bruce Roe

[sms]

These do look like lessons straight out of a solar salesman's book.

#4 is problematic, since paying more up front for higher wattage panels is definitely *not* a sure thing, and depends heavily on the price paid vs the how long the system is expected to be owned. Because the "payback" period (however you choose to define it) is usually longer for higher $ / W system, people who may not expect to live in their homes forever may be better off with the lower wattage system. Although a larger system may generate the most financial benefit over, say, 20 years, over 10 years that some use for their projections it is much less obvious.

#2 and 3 are offered without explanation. I think you'll find reasonable disagreement on the relative value of polycrystalline vs monocrystalline panels, and also the perceived value of SolarEdge even in non-shaded installations.

#11 Requires more research into the rate projections. You might not realize it, but even your $0.33 / kWh is likely to be decreasing over the next few years.

#9 is a mix of misinformation and complete speculation. The tax credit is in place through 2016. After 2016, no one knows what will happen.

#5 is kind of silly too. Installers with diverse revenue streams are more likely to be in business as market cycles for the different services they offer rise and fall.

#8 is false logic. Whether the service panel upgrade is bundled with the install or done by a pure electrician, the tax reporting is not affected either way. If it is part of the solar electric property, it doesn't matter whether the costs are on just one or the sum of many separate invoices.

For a lot of the houses in my area, you really can't do solar with the lower wattage panels. With limited roof space, enough watts to offset a sufficient amount of the bill, requires more efficient panels. It's not that the poly panels are necessarily bad, it's that they are so much less efficient that for many houses doing a system with them ends up looking awful since every inch of roof ends up with panels with conduit running everywhere.

The top tier rate has come down a little (by 3¢/KWH) but this has been offset by continuing increases in the base rate. It used to be that it made no sense to try to offset any KWH in the base rate because the KWH cost was so low but that is no longer the case, at least for PG&E.

As to the panel cost, none of the salesmen were tax people, but one said that the electrical panel upgrade is not technically part of the solar installation and whether it was bundled in or not there was no tax credit on it. Two said that if it was bundled in then the tax credit applied. Doing it separately would be iffy since it could be claimed that it was an improvement unrelated to the solar system. From what I've read, the 30% applies to "any complete solar power package, for home or business." So claiming the tax credit on a separate electrical panel installation might be iffy. It might go through, but a year down the road it could trigger an audit.

My mistake on the year. It's still 30% until 2016 then it goes down to 10%. With the recent changes in congress I don't see how Obama could get the 30% credit extended considering how anti-environment the Republicans are.

The warranty on the panels is independent of the installer, but if the installer goes out of business, as could well occur during the warranty period, who do you call for warranty service? If the panel maker goes under then you're pretty much SOL no matter who the installer is. The list of bankrupt solar panel manufacturers is very long. . Others are barely hanging on, saved only by anti-dumping tariffs which will not continue forever.

[J.P.M.]

As Sensij suggests, a lot of your thread is right out of the sales slug's playbook.

Spend a few hrs. reading prior threads about conservation, Sunpower "efficiency" charade, and not oversizing an array. Then, buy a book about residential solar. A lot of the sales hype you have heard from peddlers and repeated here is geared toward getting in your wallet. Sales slugs make money putting solar equipment on your property, not necessarily doing what's in the customer's best long term financial interests.

Take what you want of the above, scrap the rest.

[sensij]

For a lot of the houses in my area, you really can't do solar with the lower wattage panels. With limited roof space, enough watts to offset a sufficient amount of the bill, requires more efficient panels. It's not that the poly panels are necessarily bad, it's that they are so much less efficient that for many houses doing a system with them ends up looking awful since every inch of roof ends up with panels with conduit running everywhere.

I don't follow the logic here. Let's say you use 9000 kWh annually, and you can fit 16 x 60 cell panels (the Sunpower panels you've mentioned are larger, but set that aside for the moment).

If you put up 250 W panels for $3.50 / W, you have a 4000 W system that might produce 6400 kWh, leaving 2600 kWh, which should be at baseline price (let's call it $0.20 / kWh). So, that is 14,000 upfront, with 4200 back from the tax credit. $9800 total, plus a residual electric bill of $520 / yr.

If you put up 343 W panels for $4.70 / W, you have a 5520 W system that might produce 8832 kWh, leaving 168 kWh at baseline price. So, that is 25944 up front, or $18161 after the tax rebate, with a residual bill of $34 / yr.

The difference in the post tax credit cost of the two systems is ($18161 - $9800) = $8361. The residual cost difference is (520 - 34) = $486 / yr. That means it will take about 17 years for the total costs of the two systems to be equal, with no accounting for time value of money. Until then, the total electric bill (solar panel + residual electric) of the smaller system would have been less.

This is super-simplistic, but I've found that the more factors you include, the more the decision gets pushed towards buying the least expensive system that fits, unless you plan to be in the house for a very long time.