🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <4cf7cm$isf@schweik.hal.com>,
Robert Kleinschmidt <robk@hal.COM> wrote:
>In article <hatunenDKMFn7.G6B@netcom.com>,
>DaveHatunen <hatunen@netcom.com> wrote:
>>In article <4cdr61$eir@cloner3.netcom.com>,
>>Will Stewart  <will1000@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
>
>>>You will find that most installations of PV systems for the home are
>>>under 2 kW and run about $15k these days.
>
>>Assuming that, on the average over a year, these panels actually
>>produce 2 kw for 10 hours a day, then you would have a total annual
>>energy output 7300 kwh. $15k invested at 6% will yield $900 a year in
>>interest. Dividing the one by the other, this yields a cost of $0.123
>>per kwh, not cheap, even in California.
>
>1)	A more realistic number would probably be the equivalent
>	of 4-5 hours peak production/day or 2920-3650 kwh ($.25-$.30).

I ws in a generous mood. Perhaps in Arizona...

>2)	This is commonly held to be competetive with ~1/2 mile (???)
>	of new grid connection, although the connect costs for 1/2 mile
>	may be several times larger in difficult situations.

Which is competitve? The $15k or the $0.25? In any case, some sort of
amortizatin is required..

>3)	Also scales more nicely than grid connect for smaller loads.
>	(grid connect is more expensive for smaller load where PV
>	scales more or less with the load).

There's no doubt that there are areas not served by the grid where PVs
and other energy sources would be more economic than the grid. But
these are special cases. Most places are already connected to the grid.

>4)	Some other advantages, in that the system functions much
>	like a UPS, and is not subject to outages, which are an
>	especially bad problem at grid fringes.

Unless of course, the outage occurs at night, or on a dark stormy day.

>5)	Locally, interest in this stuff has been quite high after
>	a single recent storm left ~500,000 (???) PGE customers
>	without power. If you could recoup a substantial portion
>	of the costs by selling back to the utility, I suspect
>	the backup aspects of the system would give you a UPS
>	market well before financial breakeven.

Interest is not the same as buying. 

It would be interesting to know if there were any solar installations
out there that were damaged by the storms. I suspect the installed base
is too small to draw any conclusions.

Those were very unusual storms, causing damage unlike any in the last
century. it is not usually economic to build for such severe cases.

>>That doesn't include any amortization or maintenance costs.
>
>Agreed, although again, amortization of connect costs is what
>makes new grid power more expensive to the consumer than standard
>utility rate (locally I think about $.125) would indicate. Like
>the solar, these are paid or financed by the homeowner up front.

Unless, of course, the grid is already there.

Chacun a son gout...

-- 


    ********** DAVE HATUNEN (hatunen@netcom.com) **********
    *               Daly City California                  *
    *   Between San Francisco and South San Francisco     *
    *******************************************************