I love the idea of Solar, it seems like a so much more efficient and healthy way to draw our energy than fossil fuels. When we were checking over our new home the inspector recommended a renting from SolarCity, which is an interesting option, and I’m keen to learn more about price points when I get some firm numbers from them and other providers. I use the term ‘renting’ despite the inspector saying ‘Lease’ the reason for that it’s less difficult to get confused or sidetracked by a persons interpretation of the program. SolarCity actually has three options available:
- SolarCity Lease
- SolarCity PPA
- SolarCity Purchase
The first two are both lease options, and the latter involves you purchasing outright. My predilection will be to take option 3 because when there is complex financing involved, as there is with leases, often fees creep in. I’m even more skeptical when I see $0 down, as I know that they aren’t doing this out of the kindness of their hearts. I dug around a little, and then put some of the data points I discovered into an infographic:
Based on the massive tax advantages for the acquisition of Solar, which will be removed soon, we are purchasing our system outright. It’s funny when you look at the big picture, $0 is rarely a good a deal as it might first seem. Please feel free to share this infographic on your own websites or via twitter. if you want to embedded the code it is below
Copy/Paste Embed Code for Infographic
Created by Saverocity
Bravo. We pay extra to our utility to get 100% wind power, and I don’t know how lake effect in our area affects solar uptake. We might put panels on our next house (in which we’ll presumably stay longer).
That the tax credit expires in 2016 depresses me, from a public policy, not individual, standpoint.
I used to pay extra with Green Mountain Energy but in the end decided that I wasn’t comfortable with the ‘fat’ that inevitably slips into non profits. I feel a lot more comfortable about solar though.
Do you have any more info on the lake effect? That’s pretty relevant since it’s on a lake!
Yeah, The credit is a shame, but in some ways I’m not totally opposed to a free market- so I am ok without it (with the caveat that the oil and gas firms shouldn’t lobby either)
Lake Effect matters for us because we have Lake Erie to the west and Lake Ontario to the north. They’re big enough to create extra cloud cover (and often extra snow). Western Michigan and northern Ohio have the same problem. I don’t think you’ll have to deal with it.
See the map 1/3 of the way down; you’re probably clear unless you’re further upstate than I think you are: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lake-effect_snow
I’m not sure ExxonMobil is going to stop lobbying anytime soon. This country subsidizes fossil fuel production extensively. I’m going to teach my students this semester that there is no such thing as a “free market.” Case in point: How would a “free market” handle the recent decision to allow more offshore drilling on the East Coast; should every field be open, or should local residents (who might be subject to spills and environmental degradation) get a veto (or a cut)? The Coase Theorem only works with an interventionist government.
Ah yes, makes sense- not something that will impact us here I think.
As long as coal and oil are cheaper alternatives I dont see many with the discretionary income to fork over 5-20k to add solar to their houses. As it stands now gas powered H2O water heaters are still way cheaper than a solar version. Solar cells will have to continue to fall in price and increase in efficiency before any sizable amount convert over.
I also question if its actually worth an additional price on the home if left intact during the sale. I cant see someone paying 5-20k more for a house with solar v an equal one without. It might be the deciding factor if both are priced equally. So that means you’d probably have to dismantle it and sell it off to recoup some costs by the time you sell the house. I wish it was different but I dont think it is. I tried to have it installed on my house but it just didnt work out price and installer wise.
You wouldn’t have to dismantle it, you’d just sell at less than you hoped. The market always dictates. However, it’s easy to show the value via the electric bills and that you have an extra $x k per year from the asset.
If you buy for $20k it nets to $7-8k in year one, by year 3 you could sell a $20k unit generating $2k per year for a about $2-3k and still profit.
I was saying that a buyer is going to think its nice but unwilling to pay more for that house. I think most ppl would look at the solar system and say its a nice extra but I wont pay more for a house that has it. Kind of like a pool. The reason you build a pool or a solar system is for you. Dont expect to make any more money on the sale of your house with that item attached to it. So I personally would calc all ROE/ROI on your usage of it. Also be wary of those crooked electric monopolies as well. We are now stuck w Duke Energy and they are attempting to reduce the amt of money they pay out on the electric you push back to the system as well as capping the amt you can send back to them (I should say the amt of money you make by pushing back to the grid because they will continue to take all the extra power you generate but then be able to stop paying you for it)
Good point about Duke! As for the rest, it doesn’t matter- I’m sure this makes a profit, without the subsidy then much slower to do, but once you have a house that has zero electric cost and makes income then you are looking good. The breakeven at around 5.5yrs is with a zero resale cost- you could just trash the system and breakeven.
I looked at solar and it was a scam, even ignoring the absurdly high subsidies. The so-called break even calculation included absurd 7% annual cost escalation (even though our electrical power costs declined about 30% in the last 5 years thanks to Fracking lowering the cost of natgas to multi-decade low prices – and since the US is the Saudi Arabia of natgas, prices aren’t going up anytime soon). Told Solar City to go take a hike.
Can’t wait for 2016 to arrive so subsidies disappear and taxpayers aren’t paying thru the nose. Let the free market work.
I disagree- my numbers have breakeven with zero increase of electric prices. It’s a money maker over time.
As for Fracking- love it for the economics, but not so keen on it from an environmental perspective.
Over my lifetime solar will be cheaper and do less harm- works for me!
Retail electricity prices vary widely throughout the US, so what makes economic sense in one area, might not in another. Prices even vary town to town – my home town is almost double per kwh vs the next town over.
We have solar on top of our mortage free house. 3KW array, about a $50 power bill per year depending on the sun. 20K upfront, 1/3 paid by utility, 1/3 paid by fed and 1/3 by us. Estimated 6 year payback. We are in year 3 and 6 sounds about right. We netmeter which means no battery bank and the utility gets all of our excess power when we aren’t using it. We get paid for each “REC” Renewable Energy Credit and get a bank of excess generation on our bill. The excess generation goes against our A/C bill in the summer. It’s nice to know we don’t have a power bill.