PDA

View Full Version : Solar panels popping up in your town?



Mitchell Andrus
04-08-2010, 11:58 AM
Just wondering..... We have a few solar installations in town.

When I was on the planning board we were just beginning to think about planning/zoning issues re: solar panels. It was agreed that the greatest problem likely to need a solution was the cutting of trees which might be shading the proposed panel field. About 40% of my town's homes (as in many towns in NJ) have limited likelihood of a panel installation due to shade trees. This falls into two categories:

Cutting your own trees.
Cutting your neighbor's trees.

We have some pretty tight controls on tree removal in my town, anything over 10" requires a permit from the shade tree commission. Many areas with small or narrow lots and older, mature stands of tall shade trees are going to encounter problems.... Leaving the trees vs. cutting to get a clear southern view for the panels.

Aside from the financial/investment hurdles, has anyone heard of any debate and fixes for these issues? I'm just wondering what will happen when the trees eventually need to come down, esp. if they're not on your property.
.

Pat Germain
04-08-2010, 12:15 PM
A house near me has two, enormous solar panels in the back yard. They sit on stands which move and track the sun. My part of town is on the prairie where there are no trees other than small examples people have planted only a few years ago. Thus, no real tree issue.

But I can see the issue coming up on the west side of Colorado Springs where there are many trees. Good question.

Dave Wagner
04-08-2010, 12:36 PM
NOthing yet here...but big talk about a wind farm 10 miles from here....who knows if it will go thru or not.

Steve Peterson
04-08-2010, 1:03 PM
The planning commision in Folsom, CA made it a long drawn out process. He has it fairly easy since every house seems to be 2 stories tall with no large trees in the way yet. Yuo have to get all kinds of approvals in order to connect to the grid and get tax credits and refunds from the power company.

Some things he found out are:

1) Trackers that follow the sun will generate about twice as much energy as static panels. But then, static panels are often the only option for a home rooftop. The tops of comercial buildings would be better with trackers.

2) The current is limited by the current of the worst panel. His panels are wired in series to generate the highest voltage and most efficient conversion onto the grid. The downside is that if one panel gets shaded, then the current gets limited for the entire array. There may be diodes to allow the other panels to bypass the shaded panel, but then that panel is completely wasted.

3) Even with tax credits and self installation, the cost was fairly high. He considers it like pre-paying for about 20 years worth of electricity.

Steve

Dan Friedrichs
04-08-2010, 1:23 PM
The current is limited by the current of the worst panel.



This is generally true, but depends on the type of cells and how they're wired. In general, any shading at all is very bad. Shading 1% of the array might cost you 40% of your efficiency. Even things like the shadow from a small chimney or sewer vent stack are well worth dealing with.

Mitchell Andrus
04-08-2010, 1:29 PM
This is generally true, but depends on the type of cells and how they're wired. In general, any shading at all is very bad. Shading 1% of the array might cost you 40% of your efficiency. Even things like the shadow from a small chimney or sewer vent stack are well worth dealing with.

What do people do with snow? I can't imagine trying to keep an area half the size of my driveway clean 20 feet off the ground. We got a few 8 to 20" snowfalls this year. Some of this came down as slush and froze solid when it landed. Are some panels being made with heaters in them?
.

Greg Peterson
04-08-2010, 1:36 PM
I was watching a semi travel through a corridor cordoned off with large swaths of fabric. As the semi moved through I watched the pressure wave of the semi push against the fabric. And the truck wasn't moving more than 25 mph.

That got me to thinking that this pressure wave was simply wasted energy. And that every vehicle produces this pressure wave to one degree or another.

Recently some pretty smart guys came up with a tentacle type device that sits on the bottom of a river and waves back and forth with the current. The back and forth motion creates a small current which can be stored or fed to a transmission line.

I wonder why a similar technology couldn't be used to harness the air turbulence on city freeways and thorough fares to at least power the street lights for those corridors?

Just a thought.

Sandy Smith
04-08-2010, 2:22 PM
We have the tree hugger boards here in South NJ too. We came up against a problem with them over 1 tree and nothing says we couldn't trim the tree to look like a flag pole we just couldn't cut it down. So the flag pole it is. If a tree dies here then it can be cut as needed.
As to the solar panels, wow there are huge project all around. Tons everywhere. Many, many commercial buildings are covered now.
We have thousands of single panels mounted on "telephone" poles all through out our area. ?? Not sure why 1 panel up and down the highways is worth the labor, upkeep and breakage. ?? Somebody got some "free" DC money. UGH

David Weaver
04-08-2010, 2:27 PM
As to the last post, because the yield right now is too low to pay for the materials to do it. They tested the streamers in the river here a long time ago, they got positive results, but I think they weren't positive when the cost was considered, but they did demonstrate that the river current could generate electric current, even if it wouldn't be a lot. It really couldn't if you think about how a dam is designed. The maximum amount of power you'll get with pure efficiency is the amount it would take to lift the water the distance that it falls. The streamers don't really take advantage of that because they are in an almost lateral area.

As far as solar panels go, there are some folks around here who have some, but I haven't seen too many that look like a significant proportion of a household's current. We have poor potential for solar because of the huge number of cloudy days we get. the supplemental water heaters were popular for a little bit, but I haven't seen a lot of them lately. That's one thing where I'd think they make sense, but I haven't owned one and don't know if they are a maintenance hassle for the yield.

The big issue with solar, even when it's grid tie-in and you have net metering (after all the initial costs are paid of course) is insurance and the fact that they can be damaged by hail and wind. Some home insurances won't cover them at all. Hopefully, every state will have net metering soon (where you only pay for the net of what you use, not pay for the full cost of electricity coming downstream and then just generation going upstream).

Stephen Tashiro
04-08-2010, 2:32 PM
I see lots of solar panels here in southern NM.

I'm curious about the reasons behind ordinances ("back East") requiring permits to cut down trees in one's yard. Some speculations:

1. Cutting down shade trees increases the demand for electricity due to increased need for air conditioning to the owners home. (Possible, but solar panels would tend to decrease the demand for electricity from the utility company.)

2. Cutting down shade trees has some effect on the global climate of the city - increases strong winds, increases surface temperature etc.

3. Cutting down a tree of any kind can cause accidental damage if done carelessly.

4. I like to drive around and look at the pretty trees that other people must take care of.

Dan Friedrichs
04-08-2010, 2:55 PM
What do people do with snow? I can't imagine trying to keep an area half the size of my driveway clean 20 feet off the ground. We got a few 8 to 20" snowfalls this year. Some of this came down as slush and froze solid when it landed. Are some panels being made with heaters in them?
.

No heaters. Snow is a serious problem. Nothing much you can do about it, other than wait for it to come down.

The reason no one really worries about it is because places that get lots of snow aren't simultaneously getting much sunshine.

There are some new ideas with integrating the electronics into the solar module itself, which helps with the shading problem, but nothing commercially available, yet.

AL Ursich
04-08-2010, 3:21 PM
I have wondered how they handle back feeding into the Power Grid when in a storm, Trees take down Power Lines. So the wires are down and the Power Guys are working on the lines. Then a System back feeds the downed lines and zaps the power guys.... I guess it would be one more step for the Power Company finding the guys that have the ability to back feed the Grid selling excess power back. I saw the map of my area showing all the power poles and Transformers.

I know it was a problem years ago with amateur's hooking up Gas Generators improperly to a power panel and back feeding the downed wires.

AL

Drew Sanderson
04-08-2010, 3:27 PM
If your inverters meet UL standards, then it shuts down automatically when the grid dies. Further, it won't work turn back on until there is grid power for 5 minutes.

David Weaver
04-08-2010, 3:43 PM
I see lots of solar panels here in southern NM.

I'm curious about the reasons behind ordinances ("back East") requiring permits to cut down trees in one's yard. Some speculations:

1. Cutting down shade trees increases the demand for electricity due to increased need for air conditioning to the owners home. (Possible, but solar panels would tend to decrease the demand for electricity from the utility company.)

2. Cutting down shade trees has some effect on the global climate of the city - increases strong winds, increases surface temperature etc.

3. Cutting down a tree of any kind can cause accidental damage if done carelessly.

4. I like to drive around and look at the pretty trees that other people must take care of.

Town planning groups on the east coast (I grew up there) like to have a lot of control over everything. I'm not sure they have a reason as logical as any that you listed. Life is worse yet if you grow up in a historical town with a historical board to go with the rest of the town planning - they probably won't allow solar panels at all where I grew up.

Seems odd that someone else wants to tell everyone what to do with their property, and everyone says they don't like the boards telling them what to do....until someone else does something they don't like, and then they get another rule or board set up to stop it.

Mitchell Andrus
04-08-2010, 3:59 PM
Seems odd that someone else wants to tell everyone what to do with their property, and everyone says they don't like the boards telling them what to do....until someone else does something they don't like, and then they get another rule or board set up to stop it.

Zackly!

While on the planning board, I heard all of the complaining about ugly signage, poorly maintained properties, ugly commercial landscaping, cheap-looking facades and architecture proposed on new buildings.....

I also heard all of the complaining when we proposed and passed the sign ordinance, the property maintenance ordinance, commercial landscape ordinance, facade and architecture/materials ordinance.....

The government's control over us is always too great until I don't want that gas station build next to my house, then they can't do enough.

But I digress........
.

Mitchell Andrus
04-08-2010, 4:03 PM
If your inverters meet UL standards, then it shuts down automatically when the grid dies. Further, it won't work turn back on until there is grid power for 5 minutes.

Sooooo...... the solar power generated just spills out on the ground? Can't it be scooped up and saved or filtered and used for some lights or something? Seems like a waste.
.

Glenn Vaughn
04-08-2010, 5:32 PM
Seems odd that someone else wants to tell everyone what to do with their property, and everyone says they don't like the boards telling them what to do....until someone else does something they don't like, and then they get another rule or board set up to stop it.

I used to work for the City of Palo Alto. There was a cul-de-sac with three houses at the end. The owner of one of the side houses came to planning for permits for a second story - the owner of the middle hose did not object so the permits were granted. The owner of the other side house cam in a year or so later for the same. Once again the owner of the middle house did not object and the permits were granted.

A couple of years later the owner of the middle house came in for permission to build a second story. Both owners of the side hopuses objected and the permits were denied.

The owner came bac for permits to expand his house toward the rear of his lot (a very large lot). The permits were denied because he would have had to cut down a large tree on his lot. The tree was considered "historic". He ended up selling and moving out of Palo Alto.

One problem with Planning Boards (and most govenrment boards) is that many of the members fell a sense of power over their fellow citizens and are not afraid to wield it. I can speak from direct experience here - I was on our PLanning Commision for 6 years and on the City Council for 8 years. It was a constant fight to get the comision to be reasonable (the council as well).

Art Mulder
04-08-2010, 6:02 PM
Sooooo...... the solar power generated just spills out on the ground? Can't it be scooped up and saved or filtered and used for some lights or something? Seems like a waste.
.

If you want to save it, you're talking about banks of batteries, and all the control stuff that goes along with that. That really adds to the upfront cost.

Here in Ontario the gov't is trying to encourage Solar, so they have set up something called the microFIT program (http://microfit.powerauthority.on.ca/). Basically you get a contract with the gov't, and they buy ALL your power produced by your solar panels at 80 cents/kw for 20 years. And you buy back all the power you need for your house at market rates (currently around 7-8 cents I think)

So you just get your panels hooked up to one meter feeding into the grid, while another meter is for your incoming power. No batteries.

My brother is getting one of these and he figures that the microFIT program is going to turn his outlay into a 6-7yr payback, and then he still will have 13 years under the microFIT contract.

...art

Dan Friedrichs
04-08-2010, 6:12 PM
I have wondered how they handle back feeding into the Power Grid when in a storm, Trees take down Power Lines. So the wires are down and the Power Guys are working on the lines. Then a System back feeds the downed lines and zaps the power guys.... I guess it would be one more step for the Power Company finding the guys that have the ability to back feed the Grid selling excess power back. I saw the map of my area showing all the power poles and Transformers.

I know it was a problem years ago with amateur's hooking up Gas Generators improperly to a power panel and back feeding the downed wires.

AL

They have algorithms in them that prevent them from "islanding" - ie, operating without the grid present.

Drew Sanderson
04-08-2010, 7:59 PM
If you want to save it, you're talking about banks of batteries, and all the control stuff that goes along with that. That really adds to the upfront cost.

and decreases efficiency thus costing you even more.

Joe Pelonio
04-08-2010, 10:11 PM
With lots of 100' fir trees, plus big-leaf maples, alders and western redcedars, plus a city tree cutting ordinance, and only a guaranteed 60 days of sun here, I have still seen a few homes putting solar collectors up. Doesn't seem like a good investment here despite the continued electric rate increases. You really can't use the solar water heating panels here, which were gaining popularity in CA when we left there in the early '90s.

Curt Harms
04-09-2010, 9:37 AM
about 2 sets of solar panels. No cutting trees or anything like that, just "unsightly", "impacting my property value" NIMBY at its finest.

Matt Meiser
04-09-2010, 9:53 AM
I'm so glad I live in a rural area so I don't have to deal with this crap. At least as much--there was a big brouhaha (and by that I mean someone stuck a flier in our mailbox and the lady next door said something) over someone trying to split their 10 acre lot into two 5 acre lots for a new house.

I haven't seen many around here but there is a guy who's got a homeade solar heating system near me that I guess he's had running for 40 years. He's got what kind of looks like a greenhouse on one end of his house and a blower that circulates air through there to heat the house. Yeah its somewhat unsightly but not a whole lot more than my propane tank.

I'm more interested in wind myself. Its ALWAYS windy here. I want to get a weather station to determine if there's enough to make a windmill worthwhile.

David Weaver
04-09-2010, 10:01 AM
One problem with Planning Boards (and most govenrment boards) is that many of the members fell a sense of power over their fellow citizens and are not afraid to wield it. I can speak from direct experience here - I was on our PLanning Commision for 6 years and on the City Council for 8 years. It was a constant fight to get the comision to be reasonable (the council as well).

I don't think what you said can be overstated. In the historical area where I grew up, the people who end up on the boards are the ones who want to tell people what to do. The assumption that it's going to be 5 or 6 people like you and me who just want to prevent people from putting a mobile home on their front lawn turns out to be untrue.

And, as you pointed out very well, it's all about who squeaks loudest, not consistent application or fairness.

Mitchell Andrus
04-09-2010, 10:57 AM
I don't think what you said can be overstated. In the historical area where I grew up, the people who end up on the boards are the ones who want to tell people what to do. The assumption that it's going to be 5 or 6 people like you and me who just want to prevent people from putting a mobile home on their front lawn turns out to be untrue.

And, as you pointed out very well, it's all about who squeaks loudest, not consistent application or fairness.

Actually, you got it a bit upside down. Planning Bds and Boards of Adjustment listen to presentations from applicants to be sure that what they want to do is legal. I as a board member and chairman NEVER told any applicant what to do.

If they come to the board with a legal use, they get approved. Period. End of story, they get a permit. If what they seek permits for is not within community guidelines they don't. The application process also gives affected neighbors an opportunity to make their concerns known so the applicant can adjust the plans so those concerns can be minimized or eliminated.

If the community as a whole decide they support the exclusion of single-wides via zoning and land-use controls, then applications for single-wides don't even come in for a hearing. If they do make an application for a single-wide, are then turned down and they sue, they will fail in court also. This has nothing to do with 5 or 6 people telling others what to do. If zoning allows construction of a house you can build that without even coming to the board for a hearing.

This is how we keep your neighbors' 3 story addition from being built within a foot of your property line, muffler shops from popping up next to protected wetlands and $30,000.00 single-wides from being dropped next to $700,000.00 homes.

Not a perfect system, but it usually works to the benefit of the community as a whole.
.

Mike Cutler
04-09-2010, 11:25 AM
I have wondered how they handle back feeding into the Power Grid when in a storm, Trees take down Power Lines. So the wires are down and the Power Guys are working on the lines. Then a System back feeds the downed lines and zaps the power guys.... I guess it would be one more step for the Power Company finding the guys that have the ability to back feed the Grid selling excess power back. I saw the map of my area showing all the power poles and Transformers.

I know it was a problem years ago with amateur's hooking up Gas Generators improperly to a power panel and back feeding the downed wires.

AL

Al

The investment in a solar system is pretty substantial. There is quite a bit of electronic control and protection built into the system. This puts a solar system installation, at least on a large scale, out of the reach of most DIY'r. In fact to obtain the tax credits/rebates in some states requires that an approved contractor perform the installation.

As for the gas fired generators; If a little gas fired generator tries to buck the grid it loses. Restoring power to a thousand people won't be held up by a few home generators installed incorrectly.
Plugging the generator into the dryer receptacle and openeing the main breaker in your panel does not completely disconnect your home from the grid. If a person really wants to have a backup generator, and there's nothing wrong with that, the money spent on a code legal disconnect installation is money well spent.

Sorry for the shameless plug about generator installation, but the line crews really have enough trouble on their hands after a storm as it is.

Ken Garlock
04-09-2010, 11:26 AM
Throw away your solar panels, and solve the problem with Nuclear Power.:cool::cool::) 70% of France uses nuclear power, and they reprocess the used fuel rods to recover the remaining fuel. If the French, those great warriors of WWI and WWII can overcome the problems of atomic power, why can't the US?:mad:
The supreme court has already ruled that YOUR property can condemned if a some company wants to build an apartment of shopping center on it. So, go out and condemn a section of rural property and build a nuclear power plant. The US navy has already solved the problem of how to run nuclear power plants. Hummm, maybe we need a new branch of the Navy to run land-based plants.:confused:

Bryan Morgan
04-09-2010, 11:46 AM
A few people around me have solar panels. Solicitors are always trying to sell them to me. They always talk about how it saves money yadda yadda.... sure. If you do a little math and think about how much these panels cost, it would take me about 10 years to start "saving money". No thanks. I'll stick to the power grid.

Bryan Morgan
04-09-2010, 11:51 AM
I used to work for the City of Palo Alto. There was a cul-de-sac with three houses at the end. The owner of one of the side houses came to planning for permits for a second story - the owner of the middle hose did not object so the permits were granted. The owner of the other side house cam in a year or so later for the same. Once again the owner of the middle house did not object and the permits were granted.

A couple of years later the owner of the middle house came in for permission to build a second story. Both owners of the side hopuses objected and the permits were denied.

The owner came bac for permits to expand his house toward the rear of his lot (a very large lot). The permits were denied because he would have had to cut down a large tree on his lot. The tree was considered "historic". He ended up selling and moving out of Palo Alto.

One problem with Planning Boards (and most govenrment boards) is that many of the members fell a sense of power over their fellow citizens and are not afraid to wield it. I can speak from direct experience here - I was on our PLanning Commision for 6 years and on the City Council for 8 years. It was a constant fight to get the comision to be reasonable (the council as well).

Its stuff like this that furthers my argument that there is no such thing as private property. The fact that something I supposedly own can be dictated and taxed tells me I don't really own anything. I don't think this is how it was meant to be...

Mitchell Andrus
04-09-2010, 1:13 PM
Throw away your solar panels, and solve the problem with Nuclear Power.:cool::cool::) 70% of France uses nuclear power, and they reprocess the used fuel rods to recover the remaining fuel. If the French, those great warriors of WWI and WWII can overcome the problems of atomic power, why can't the US?:mad:
The supreme court has already ruled that YOUR property can condemned if a some company wants to build an apartment of shopping center on it. So, go out and condemn a section of rural property and build a nuclear power plant. The US navy has already solved the problem of how to run nuclear power plants. Hummm, maybe we need a new branch of the Navy to run land-based plants.:confused:


Couldn't have said it better myself. In 30 or 40 years, it'll come down to nuclear 'cause when the oil's all gone and the wind isn't blowing and it's dark out, 12 billion people are all gonna want to cook dinner at the same time.

I've pre-ordered a "Mr. Fusion" home unit. ....Pays for itself in 400 years, give or take.

http://www.coolest-gadgets.com/20071219/toshiba-creates-home-nuclear-power-plant/

.

Mitchell Andrus
04-09-2010, 1:24 PM
Its stuff like this that furthers my argument that there is no such thing as private property. The fact that something I supposedly own can be dictated and taxed tells me I don't really own anything. I don't think this is how it was meant to be...

You have "Rights in Property" (Property Rights) to property you own and these rights are under common's control. If you think you should be allowed to build whatever you want just anywhere.... so do your neighbors. Maybe a new gas station across the street from your house is OK, as long as there aren't any controls you can't say no, right?

So you're right, it wasn't mean to be this way. People were also supposed to respect each other's right to fresh water, to see the sun and enjoy a quiet back yard. But that isn't working out so good either, even with laws in place.

If you have a better way......
.

Glenn Vaughn
04-09-2010, 1:58 PM
Actually, you got it a bit upside down. Planning Bds and Boards of Adjustment listen to presentations from applicants to be sure that what they want to do is legal. I as a board member and chairman NEVER told any applicant what to do.


You are correct; the decisions are based mainly on the zoning laws. There is also the ability to reccommend/approve a variance. Conditions may also be required.

It may work differently in your comunity. In my community the Planning Commission had multiple functions. The commission never actualy approves anything; they make recommendations to the CIty Council for them to make the final decision. The commission also has the ability to recommend requirements that are not part of the zoning laws; things like street improvemnts, water system upgrades etc. While council has the final say, they are prone to accept the commission recommendations.

The commission also has the task of keeping the zoning laws up-to-date. Once again the council has the final say but relies heavily on the commission.

Also the commission and the council rely a great deal on the Planning & Zoning Department. All I will say here is that, at least in my community, there are employees who have no sense of responsibility to the people of the community. Many times the recommendations are based opn what is being done in some other community and not on what is really needed or wanted in our comunity. A case in point was an attempt a few years ago to rezone a large portion of the single family residential zone bordering on the central district to "mixed commercial/multi-family residential. It was a huge fight to get the council to reject it.

Many communities are concerned with things like "Visual Pollution" and "Historic" issues. The OP mention Sign Ordinance; we have a new sign ordinance that took almost 3 years to get implemented and is detrimental to many businesses in town. The arguments for the ordinance were based on the concept of "Visual Pollution" and preserving the "Historic look" of the town. The commission and council ignored the photographic evidence of the late 1800's showing the downtown business with signs in every window (now illegal in most cases).

Jeffrey Makiel
04-09-2010, 6:27 PM
I believe that solar and wind power have inadvertently become a distraction towards achieving the true goal of having an inexhaustible, clean power supply that will the meet realistic needs of an ever growing world demand. Although worthy, I just think these technologies are oversold.

The thought of chopping down trees to support a solar array makes me cringe. I agree with Stephan's post above, (post #10). There was a recent court case (I think in California) where someone made their neighbor chop their trees down (at the neighbor's cost too!) because it blocked his newly installed solar panel. Perhaps this is an extreme example. But perhaps this is where we are heading.

I hate to see drastic measures or legislation enacted to overly protect solar power because solar has its limits, and its limits are very low. That is, the density of photonic energy gracing the earth's surface simply does not produce a sufficient energy flux even if harvested at 100% efficiency. And then there are those pesky clouds.

In my town they are placing small solar panels on streetlight poles. I can only guess that the economics are artificial via the use of government sponsored solar credits (that is, tax dollars). I recently saw one lamp in action, and you've got to be kidding me.

And as for wind, it too is a sporadic source. Most folks in the US live in close proximity to each other. What kind of environmental quality would we have with these things spinning around us all the time? To make wind really work in a significant way, we have to be able to store the energy and transmit it using technology way more capable than we presently have. At least we'll eat well from all the whacked birds.

What's more interesting is that many of these 'green' technologies use a lot of energy to manufacture. On a 'global goodness' scale, their true net benefit (cradle to grave) falls short over the life cycle of these technologies. This, again, has to do with the energy density and reliability they provide.

The real answers are also the big investments. The near term solutions appear to be clean burning coal and more fission plants. These solutions have their problems too, but they are proven high performers. And, they are extremely reliable. We also need to upgrade the national electric grid which has been neglected along with other vital US infrastructure.

For the long term, the solution is likely fusion, but this is a difficult nut to crack. The US was once the world leader in this research, but I think other places like Europe, South Korea and Japan will now lead. We're too busy sticking solar panels on street lights for that warm and fuzzy feeble glow. :)

-Jeff :)

Bryan Morgan
04-09-2010, 6:55 PM
You have "Rights in Property" (Property Rights) to property you own and these rights are under common's control. If you think you should be allowed to build whatever you want just anywhere.... so do your neighbors. Maybe a new gas station across the street from your house is OK, as long as there aren't any controls you can't say no, right?

I have no problem with what other people do with their property as long as it doesn't mess with mine. Build whatever you want, just keep it on your side. Paint your house fluorescent pink, you paid for it, who is anyone else to tell you differently? Put up solar panels, an oil drilling device, nuclear power plant, I don't care. Just keep the noise down and keep any spillage, fumes, or mess on your side.


So you're right, it wasn't mean to be this way. People were also supposed to respect each other's right to fresh water, to see the sun and enjoy a quiet back yard. But that isn't working out so good either, even with laws in place.

If you have a better way......
.

I do have a better way actually...

Dan Friedrichs
04-09-2010, 8:34 PM
What's more interesting is that many of these 'green' technologies use a lot of energy to manufacture. On a 'global goodness' scale, their true net benefit (cradle to grave) falls short over the life cycle of these technologies. This, again, has to do with the energy density and reliability they provide.

FYI, a typical (large-scale) wind turbine will generate 30 times as much energy as it costs to manufacture and install. A solar PV array will generate 5 times as much.

Bryan Morgan
04-10-2010, 12:12 AM
FYI, a typical (large-scale) wind turbine will generate 30 times as much energy as it costs to manufacture and install. A solar PV array will generate 5 times as much.

I have a business location in Palm Desert... If you've ever been there, you've seen the miles of these giant wind mill things. Well, they are always breaking down, the quality of power sucks (its always fluctuating and messing with my network equipment, as well as just going down completely), they take up a massive amount of space, and the cost of power is ridiculous. I'll take nuclear power over this any day. ;)

Mike Cutler
04-10-2010, 9:28 AM
Bryan

I'm not sure why the power produced by the wind generators is any more expensive than an alternate source for you. Your electric rates are set by the DPUC in California. ( Ca. reversed/modified it's original de-regulation bill a few years back.)

To no one in particular.

Solar and wind generators are small scale producers, relatively speaking. Unless we want to see the landscape littered with solar panels and wind turbines, which I don't. However, they can relieve the demand on the grid for larger power loads that cannot be powered economically by these sources.
Decreasing the residential load total on the grid would have the same net effect as adding additional power plants. This can be effected through the use and installation of solar panels and passive heat exchangers on individual residences, and small businesses.
Nobody's electric rates are going down, they are only going up. In Connecticut at 19 cents a kilowatt hour it doesn't take long to see the economic advatage of converting as much energy usage as possible to self contained sources. I also don't think it will be long before having passive and active solar systems on residences will effect the resale value of a hom ein a positve manner making the actual payback of the investment shorter. I know that if I were building new today, I would be installing as much passive and active solar as I could. Personally, I'd like to go off the grid.

As someone that works at a large baseload nuclear power plant, I'd personally like to see a resurgance of nuclear power. As a consumer that pays my own electric bill, I'd like to see a lot more solar technology hit the market that could be installed by the homeowner.

Jeffrey Makiel
04-10-2010, 9:43 AM
FYI, a typical (large-scale) wind turbine will generate 30 times as much energy as it costs to manufacture and install. A solar PV array will generate 5 times as much.

Dan...
My statement that was quoted is in regards to actual energy usage (KW, diesel, gasoline, etc.) for the fabrication of the device, fuel for shipping it, fuel to perform the maintenance on it and eventually fuel to dismantle and dispose of it. My statement is emphasizing that all these things require energy. Remember, the overall goal is net fossile energy reduction of any chosen energy generating system. Not just transferring fossil energy usage from one medium to another.

Also, I would have to disagree based upon economics. At least for where I live.

We just recently examined a 1 megawatt solar array at my workplace and found that the payback time was enormous. This was based on an 8 cent per kilowatt-hr commercial utility rate which isn’t bad. The initial outlay cost included the cost of the array, installation, and modification to the infrastructure's electrical system. Then the annual maintenance costs over the life of the array was included.

Sadly, a few weeks ago, we had to kill the project due to economics.

On the home front, the residential electric rate in my region is around 19.5 cents per kilowatt-hour. It's amongst the highest in the nation, possibly swaying the economics in favor of solar and wind. However, there are other factors to consider.

For instance, properties in my regional area are very small, typically less than 1 acre. Many towns, like the town I live in, have building lots as small as 40' wide. This is also the case for most other densely populated areas of the US. It is simply too small for wind turbines. Also, much of the housing is quite old which typically has tall construction with a small footprint (and roof). Even new construction is doing the same thing because land is tight. Even if we chop all the trees down, there still isn't much area space for solar.

It's all about the compact energy density of oil, coal and the atomic nucleus.

-Jeff :)

Robert Willing
06-04-2017, 5:44 PM
I have 24 PV Solar panels since 2012 and have generated in excess of 25MWh. Mine are ground mounted and the front of the array is 3' off the ground. Yes in winter I clean the snow off with a painters telescopic pole and soft push broom. I am grid tied and if I loose power no line man gets fried. The power turns off within 2 sec or less, that is how the power company certifies them, and they come back on in 5 min. once power is restored. I started with 16 and added 8 more last year, and am still happy. Yes there are a lot of NIMBY's nay stayers. I live on 41 acres and my closest neighbor is 1350' away. I had trees removed and my lot is heavily wooded. I made the mistake of installing wind first, and all I have to say is forget it.

Art Mann
06-04-2017, 8:24 PM
The idea of solar power fascinates me. Every few years, I do a careful analysis of the viability of installing a system. The result is always the same. Financially, it is a big loser when compared to paying a power bill and investing my money elsewhere. I am coming to believe the same thing Jeff Makiel said in post #33. Solar and wind power generation technologies are just an unfortunate distraction on the way to discovering the real solution. It is kind of like the invention of the vacuum tube. It had the unfortunate effect of delaying the invention of semiconductors for decades.

Mike Henderson
06-04-2017, 8:49 PM
The idea of solar power fascinates me. Every few years, I do a careful analysis of the viability of installing a system. The result is always the same. Financially, it is a big loser when compared to paying a power bill and investing my money elsewhere. I am coming to believe the same thing Jeff Makiel said in post #33. Solar and wind power generation technologies are just an unfortunate distraction on the way to discovering the real solution. It is kind of like the invention of the vacuum tube. It had the unfortunate effect of delaying the invention of semiconductors for decades.

I wonder what that "real solution" could be. In the meanwhile, solar works well here in CA where we have very high electricity rates. I have 14 panels and that basically zeros me out with the power company.

Recently, however, they put in a small flat charge to maintain the grid. I'm not opposed to that because I need the grid, especially at night and on rainy days.

Mike

[I never heard anyone say that the vacuum tube delayed the development of the semiconductor device, and I doubt if that's true. Perhaps you mean that the acceptance and use of semiconductors was slowed because the vacuum tube already existed and people were familiar with vacuum tubes and not with semiconductors.]

Brian Henderson
06-04-2017, 10:38 PM
I wonder what that "real solution" could be. In the meanwhile, solar works well here in CA where we have very high electricity rates. I have 14 panels and that basically zeros me out with the power company.

Recently, however, they put in a small flat charge to maintain the grid. I'm not opposed to that because I need the grid, especially at night and on rainy days.


California is bizarre that way. They spend all of their time pushing "green" tech, then they realize that as people adopt it, they aren't making any more money so they freak out and start charging people all the money they promised that they'd save. The same was true of the electric cars and hybrids. Without buying a lot of gas, there was no money for road repairs (not like they actually use gas tax money for what it's earmarked for) and now they want the hybrid owners to shell out a bunch of money to pay for roads when that was the whole selling point of buying hybrids, saving money.

Brian Elfert
06-04-2017, 10:51 PM
I am in the process of installing 21 solar panels on my detached garage roof. I believe they should completely cover my electric bill as long as net metering is in place. I am looking at about a ten year payback.

I know a solar guy who is getting my array installed at no cost as part of a demonstration project. I bought and paid for the solar equipment myself so they really are not charging me.

Mike Henderson
06-04-2017, 11:22 PM
California is bizarre that way. They spend all of their time pushing "green" tech, then they realize that as people adopt it, they aren't making any more money so they freak out and start charging people all the money they promised that they'd save. The same was true of the electric cars and hybrids. Without buying a lot of gas, there was no money for road repairs (not like they actually use gas tax money for what it's earmarked for) and now they want the hybrid owners to shell out a bunch of money to pay for roads when that was the whole selling point of buying hybrids, saving money.

There's a difference between charging for the electricity and charging for the delivery. I generate excess electricity so they get to use my excess and sell it to someone else. The pay me retail rates so I get a good deal, and I expect that will go away some day.

But the grid is different. I can't sell my excess electricity without the grid. And the grid is a backup for when the sun is not shining. The grid provides an essential service to me and I should help pay for it.

If I don't pay to maintain the grid, the cost will fall on those who don't have solar and that's not really fair, is it?

Regarding hybrid cars, they use the roads and somebody has to pay for those roads. If the hybrid owners don't pay anything, they are getting a free ride and all the rest of us are paying for them to use the roads. That would not be fair and the hybrid owners should pay their fair share. CA recently ran a pilot program (http://www.dot.ca.gov/road_charge/) (which I participated in) of different techniques to monitor the number of miles driven so that an alternate tax system could possible be used to charge people for the use of the roads.

Hybrid car owners get the advantage of lower "fuel" costs, plus they may get to use the HOV lanes.

Mike

John Terefenko
06-05-2017, 12:07 AM
In central NJ solar is huge. Many homes have them installed which to me look ugly and the roof problems can be a mess. There are solar panels installed on most telephone poles to tie in with the grid which is an eye soar but you get use to it. Then there are the solar farms and they pop up on every piece of open land. The thing I do like is the installation on many office building roofs and parking garages and also many warehouses. That is free territory that those companies can take advantage of. When I was still working we installed many of these on various industrial roofs. The snow here is NJ is a problem for solar panels on roofs. The added weight that traps snow drifts on roofs has known to cause collapses. Snow sliding from the panels or ice build up cause damage to gutters as well. I do not see the advantage for home owners especially if one of those problems arise. They also do have a shelf life and each year that shelf life decreases.

roger wiegand
06-05-2017, 8:46 AM
We had a major group buy of PV solar in our town about four years ago, and as a result about 20% of the houses in town now have solar. We have a system that has been providing about 35% of our electricity needs. There's no indication of any sort of snow or roof problems in MA, so either we have lighter snow stronger roofs, or better installers. In any event, no issues have come up among hundreds of installations. We're on track to pay back our investment in the panels in 6-7 years total.

The news that some folks don't want to hear is that the cost for new industrial scale commercial solar installations is at about even with coal now and continuing to drop, which means that economics will drive ongoing conversion unless lobbying interests do something to artificially inflate the cost of solar. Home units continue to be relatively expensive, but it is a small thing that one can do as an individual and if the panels successfully produce for 25+ years economically sensible, if not the "best" investment there is. (better than a savings account for sure). It's a real shame that we (the US) seem to be committed to giving away this new business to China and others.

Yes, common infrastructure needs to be paid for. The "gas tax" model in which taxes on fuel allegedly pay for roads has been a joke for decades. One look at the roads in most states will tell you the money is going elsewhere. Plus there would be riots of the tax were raised to cover the costs of maintaining a first class road system. (At some point we will, I hope, be embarrassed that our roads are among the worst in the world) A use tax where your odometer reading is recorded when you get your state inspection each year and you pay $0.001/mile traveled (or whatever) would make a lot more sense.

The utilities hate that distributed PV will require a lot less transmission infrastructure (and therefore lower capital cost, leading to a lower rate base), but the smarter ones will develop models to get paid while maintaining the required network. State utility commissions know this has to happen. Smart metering can be deployed to ensure that everyone pays a fair share of the costs.

Robert Willing
06-05-2017, 9:18 AM
Two things vacuum tubes are still live and well that is why they are in high end sound systems, according to "how it made"TV.
The 25MWh is equivalent to nearly 1/2 my total electric bill for that time period. I did the install myself and the only help I had was the cementing in the post for the ground mount, laying the panels on the grid, and clearing the land, and yes I was 72 when I started.

Steve Peterson
06-05-2017, 2:21 PM
The idea of solar power fascinates me. Every few years, I do a careful analysis of the viability of installing a system. The result is always the same. Financially, it is a big loser when compared to paying a power bill and investing my money elsewhere. I am coming to believe the same thing Jeff Makiel said in post #33. Solar and wind power generation technologies are just an unfortunate distraction on the way to discovering the real solution. It is kind of like the invention of the vacuum tube. It had the unfortunate effect of delaying the invention of semiconductors for decades.

We have a large house and a power company that charges progressively higher prices after you exceed the baseline. We end up paying around $0.40 per kwh for a large portion of our electricity during the summer months. Even if we took out a loan at 10% and the price of electricity never goes up, our system will pay for itself in about 6 years. Everything generated after 6 years is free.

The cost effectiveness may be completely different in other parts of the country.

Steve

Mike Henderson
06-05-2017, 2:31 PM
Essentially all the solar panels sold today are guaranteed for 20 years. That means (for most of the guarantees) that the panel will output at least 95% of the electricity it would output when new, under the same sunlight conditions. If they'll guarantee them for 20 years, I expect they'll last for 25 to 30 years. That's a long time to save money on your electric bill.

I figure mine will pay off in about 10 years - and that's because we don't use much electricity - our electric bill was never very high before we put the solar panels in. My wife just wanted to be green.

Most people who have a pool (and therefore use more electricity because of the pump) or use a lot of air conditioning, will see faster recovery of their investment - especially here in CA where we have very high electricity prices.

Mike

Art Mann
06-05-2017, 3:28 PM
I hate to be political but solar is economically favorable in certain parts of the country because the State governments have put into place policies that artificially inflate the cost of conventional power. There are a lot of other States where the public will not put up with that. Most of the economic analyses I see for solar, or wind for that matter, do not take into consideration the time value of money. I could buy a solar system or I could invest where the rest of my money is invested and get a much better return.

Malcolm McLeod
06-05-2017, 3:56 PM
... paying around $0.40 per kwh ...

The cost effectiveness may be completely different in other parts of the country.

Steve

Texas costs run around $0.10/kWh from typical gas-fired plants, some providers offer 'certified green' options for ~20% adder. ROI/payback for PV is just shy of never in this environment. And maybe why people are moving here in droves?

I have heard TX is leading wind-power generator in US, and there are literally mile after mile of wind farms out west. I've also heard you need ~12 mph annual average wind speed to get any ROI ... strictly looking at the financials, w/ no allowance for how 'green' you wish to live. Wind average in Amarillo/Lubbock/Midland corridor (out west) is probably 20mph; east half is maybe 9-10 mph.

Todd Willhoit
06-05-2017, 10:06 PM
Texas costs run around $0.10/kWh from typical gas-fired plants...

Using powertochoose.org can keep you in the $0.06-$0.08/kWh range if you know and manage your usage. That makes solar a hard sell.

Also, I wonder about servicing the roof. Roofs don't last long in our intense heat. How do you replace a roof without removing the panels?

Mike Henderson
06-05-2017, 11:07 PM
Using powertochoose.org can keep you in the $0.06-$0.08/kWh range if you know and manage your usage. That makes solar a hard sell.

Also, I wonder about servicing the roof. Roofs don't last long in our intense heat. How do you replace a roof without removing the panels?

You have to remove the panels to replace the roof. What installers do around here (if the homeowner agrees to it) is put 50 year shingles under the panels when they do the install (basically put a new roof under the panels). So if the rest of the roof has to be replaced, the area under the panels can be left in place.

Also, the panels shade that portion of the roof so the roof in that area doesn't degrade as quickly as the rest of the roof.

Mike

Mel Fulks
06-05-2017, 11:22 PM
I've got a 1980s three panel solar water heater. Came with the house and works well. When we bought a good "50 year"
roof " and had to temporarily remove them ,we had a big piece of copper flashing installed at their bottom edge. The idea is that when another roof is needed the shingles under the panels will still be good. Panels will stay up .

Rick Potter
06-08-2017, 3:31 AM
Yes, I know this is a 7 year old thread, but no one really answered the OP's question about where to find answers to his questions about rules for solar. I put in 46 panels on my roof about the same time as Mike Henderson, 4 years or so ago.

I was told that California recognized the problem and passed a law in 1978 covering the basic rules, which I will summarize. We can put in solar if we have clear space to the sky to do it. My neighbor cannot stop me if I meet the requirements. I cannot require him to remove any trees growing on his property which may block my system. He cannot plant a tree in an area of his property to block my existing system, if he does I can sue to have it removed with cause.

So, I would suggest anyone working on a planning commission or board, look to what other areas are doing that works, and use their experience as guides. I would start with state laws in your own state first...they may already exist.

In California, it is also law that any system, attached to the grid ,automatically shut down if power outages occur. This is to protect power company people trying to work on the outage from being electrocuted.

By the way, in my area you cannot profit much from selling extra power back to the company, as they only pay you back 3 cent per kWh, much less that we pay for the first tier bracket. I have averaged a few bucks a year from Edison. In other words, my system is handling all my uses so far, including two plug in hybrid cars. It is due to finish payback this year. As before mentioned, we pay a service fee to maintain the lines, which only seems right.


EDIT: Interesting, I just got my electric bill. I used 671 kWh last month, and produced 1,140, (This is the good part of the year, not using much AC, and no heat. Rainy season is over, so we are stockpiling electrons). Tier 1 power costs over 8 cents for an amount up to 323, then cost goes up to almost 17 cents. They also have a high usage charge of an extra 13 cents for 'high usage'. Expensive.

My bill is for -$75, but I owe 9.87 for line fees. I am in a revolving Net Consumption system, and the extra rolls over month to month. The new year starts in June, so this bill is the final for last year and it says I have $88 rebate for last year coming. I just send them a check for a hundred or so, once a year, which is to pay for the line fees.

The bill is really confusing, and probably is meant to be.

What is really interesting is that last year I got about $90 from my solar company, because the system did not produce quite as much as they guaranteed it would.

Another shout out to my late Aunt Lois, who left us the money to install the system. I think she would be happy we put it to good use.