Solar and wind are the future

[Pointedstick]

Most people don't realize this, but solar and wind now economically outcompete most other methods of generating electricity, including both natural gas and coal. This is a major deal!

https://cleantechnica.com/2015/04/13/so ... er-prices/



Keep in mind these are unsubsidized prices, and it's also ignoring other generation systems' costs and consequences to human health and the environment (smog, air pollution, more asthma, oil spills, aquifer contamination, toxic waste leaks, geopolitical dependence on unstable parts of the world, etc). The town I live in gets 100% of its water from an aquifer that fossil fuel companies want to frack over. That just seems like a terrible, horrible, no-good-very-bad idea to me, and it doesn't seem like this should be political at all. Aquifers have been contaminated by oil and gas exploration before:
https://www.epa.gov/hfstudy
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-e ... TL20111208
http://www.desmogblog.com/2014/10/07/ce ... wastewater

These are all probably good reasons why new electric generation was 69% renewable in 2015 and 99% in 2016!.

It's interesting how mainstream this stuff is getting. Just yesterday I was walking my dog and struck up a conversation with a neighbor. Turns out he's a Jim Rickards fan and worries about some kind of IMF-led monetary collapse on January 1st 2017. He's stocking up on food, water, gold, and guns. He showed me his garage, where has has 4 KW of solar panels ready to mount as well as a huge battery backup system. If the friendly suburban neighborhood survivalist is going solar, it's mainstream. He'll be the third house on my block to get solar, and hopefully I'll be the fourth soon.

It's all going critical mass. You can now get a rooftop solar array installed for $3 a watt, often much less with subsidies. I'm strongly considering making a career change and going into this field.

[Xan]

Keep in mind these are unsubsidized prices, and it's also ignoring other generation systems' costs and consequences to human health and the environment (smog, air pollution, more asthma, oil spills, aquifer contamination, toxic waste leaks, geopolitical dependence on unstable parts of the world, etc).

I'm pretty skeptical about most of this, although it may be true. This part, though... You're ignoring the horror that is manufacture of (in particular) batteries. That is a nasty process.

[Pointedstick]

Another thing about the economics: it's often a no-brainer to go solar.

For example: I have a roughly $30/mo electric bill. That requires $9,000 in investments to offset forever ($30*12 months * 25 years for 4% withdrawal rate). If I can zero out my electric bill for less than $9,000 with solar, it's a better economic deal! If your electric bill is much higher than that, it's probably even more of a no-brainer, even if yo live somewhere cloudy.

So I use http://pvwatts.nrel.gov to estimate the size of the system I'll need. I'm estimating extremely conservatively, by multiplying my peak month by 12 gives me a maximum yearly consumption of 3360 kWh per year. PVWatts says I need a 1.9 kWh array facing south with a 35˚ tilt. The cost of this array is 1900 watts * $3.50/watt avg * 0.6 (federal and state rebates) = $3,990. That's less than half the cost to null out my electric bill compared to simply accumulating investments! Of course the investments are more liquid, but still, that's a fantastic deal. It's likely even better in real life if I estimate my consumption using realistic rather than conservative figures.

It gets even better if I switch all my gas appliances to electric and null out my gas bill too, which currently costs me $13/mo minimum, even when I'm not using any gas. That means there's a $3,900 investment savings to just getting rid of that base charge.

My yearly utility bill costs before I started this were an average of $1,468 a year, which costs $36,700 to offset with investments. So I started working on deleting those bills entirely. I spent $14,000 on energy efficiency work to reduce the consumption (too much in retrospect, but lesson learned). Then I spent $3,200 to convert my water heater and range from gas to to electric. That leaves $19,500 for the HVAC and solar panels; if they cost less than that, I'm ahead financially, and I've accrued a zillion side benefits too (zero net carbon emissions from my house, no risk of carbon monoxide poisoning or the house blowing up, eliminated utility cost pricing risk, etc).

You can do it too! You might be surprised by how financially advantageous it can be to go this route, especially if your house already uses mostly or entirely electric appliances.

[Pointedstick]

Keep in mind these are unsubsidized prices, and it's also ignoring other generation systems' costs and consequences to human health and the environment (smog, air pollution, more asthma, oil spills, aquifer contamination, toxic waste leaks, geopolitical dependence on unstable parts of the world, etc).

I'm pretty skeptical about most of this, although it may be true. This part, though... You're ignoring the horror that is manufacture of (in particular) batteries. That is a nasty process.

That's true, but most don't actually need batteries. Even at the utility scale, it's not generally necessary. The sun is always shining and the wind is always blowing somewhere, and power generated there can simply be sent along high-voltage transmission lines, just like it is now. Most of our power already comes from hundreds or thousands of miles away. Also, when it's dark, we don't really use much power. Human activity tracks the sun pretty well. And peak loads or additional needed capacity at night or during prolonged still and cloudy weather can be provided by nuclear, hydroelectric, geothermal, or a small number of fossil burners. Batteries really don't come into the equation for power generation all that much (now vehicles, that's another story…).

[Pointedstick]

Keep in mind these are unsubsidized prices, and it's also ignoring other generation systems' costs and consequences to human health and the environment (smog, air pollution, more asthma, oil spills, aquifer contamination, toxic waste leaks, geopolitical dependence on unstable parts of the world, etc).

I'm pretty skeptical about most of this, although it may be true.

Have a look at this stuff: https://cleantechnica.com/2016/07/11/7- ... t-choices/

Things are changing faster than most of us realize.

Note: I'm not at all affiliated with CleanTechnica, but I find their analyses to be rational, realistic, and well-supported.

[bedraggled]

Having just relocated to Florida, we noticed an absence of solar panels. Too small a sample size or are they not permitted? Would like to know for when we buy in a year.

Also, for you engineers and electricians, there do not seem to be attic fans on houses here. When we owned in Long Island, NY, our attic fan kept the house pleasant starting in early spring. We had a new asphalt black roof. The fan thermostat was set at 110 degrees. I recall it turned on in March each year. Are attic fans incompatible with these tile rooves?

Thanks.

[Pointedstick]

Having just relocated to Florida, we noticed an absence of solar panels. Too small a sample size or are they not permitted? Would like to know for when we buy in a year.

You can definitely get them. Might be just that your neighborhood is filled with crotchety folks who hate change, since the market in Florida is actually huge: http://www.seia.org/state-solar-policy/florida

However, legal policies are not as good as they could be: https://solarpowerrocks.com/florida/

It probably matters little though since since Florida is just about the perfect climate for solar. The period of highest yearly load is when there's most solar irradiance: summer, air conditioning, long day with sun high in the sky, most houses have low-pitched roofs, and there's not much of a winter load since heating needs are minimal to nonexistent.

Also, for you engineers and electricians, there do not seem to be attic fans on houses here. When we owned in Long Island, NY, our attic fan kept the house pleasant starting in early spring. We had a new asphalt black roof. The fan thermostat was set at 110 degrees. I recall in turned on in March each year. Are attic fans incompatible with these tile roves?

Attic fans make the most sense in climates that are dry with cool spring weather and large daily temperature fluctuations. In these climates, you can charge your house with cool, dry air in the mornings and coast throughout the day. Florida is super humid and the temperature in the swing seasons often isn't much below the interior thermostat setpoint. All you're doing most of the time is adding to the moisture load of the house, which is counterproductive if you might need to turn on the AC later in the day (air conditioners work harder to reduce moisture than they do to reduce temperature). Attic fans are perfect for most places west of the rockies, tolerable in New York, but not very useful in Florida.

[Cortopassi]

I don't know how or when it will be truly feasible, but a few satellites up in orbit with miles of solar panels transmitting microwave power down to a receiving station could be the future. Sun always up, no clouds.

http://spacejournal.ohio.edu/issue18/cast.html

And it got into my mind after reading Ben Bova's Powersat...

------------------

If this idea of a solar roof ever becomes reasonably cost competitive, I sure would do it:

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles ... oof-coming

[WiseOne]

Thanks for this timely post, because I will definitely look into solar for my coop, although I suspect the regulatory hoops are insurmountable. I'm on the Systems and Buildings subcommittee for my coop and am running for the Board(!).

Anyway...this chart is very interesting! And counterintuitive. If this is the case, why are green energy ESCOs more expensive than the standard supply? This is true even for the ones that are 100% wind power. I have a feeling a lot of important associated costs are being left out of this chart.

However, small differences in power generation costs may be almost irrelevant. The breakdown of a Con Edison residential electric bill: $20 + taxes/fees as a base charge, and electricity costs add up to > 30 cents/kWH, of which around 8 cents are for the electricity supply. The rest is "delivery". If I take Con Edison at their word, it sounds like a significant chunk (somewhere between 1/5 - 1/3) of home energy costs go to administrative overhead, and the vast majority of the rest is for their power distribution network.

If that's true, then it's actually much more of a win to focus on reducing power distribution costs. Which are strong suits for solar, small wind towers, and geothermal.

[Pointedstick]

Ok, now this is interfering with my work.

PS, my annual electric bill was $1,643 for 17,285 kWh. (by the way, WiseOne, those NYC electric rates are brutal! Ouch).

If I take 25*$1643, I could perhaps justify spending over $40K on a solar system. I spent another $655 on gas last year also (heat and water heat), so there's more potential savings there with conversion to electric.

You're somewhere in TN, right? I'm gonna pull Chattanooga out of a hat and model a PV array there. http://pvwatts.nrel.gov says you need a 13 kW system, which has an unsubsidized cost of $45,000 (13000*$3.5), or at least as low as $31,850 after the 30% federal tax credit. It gets better if there are any TN-specific rebates. But at that high a usage level, energy-efficiency measures will likely pay for themselves very quickly, and a 13 KW array is huge and hard to install, so you need to get your usage down--a lot.

Your usage is an average of 1,440 kW per month which is extremely high considering that you don't have an electric water heater, so there's likely a lot of low-hanging fruit to reduce consumption (by comparison, my monthly electric bill peaked at 288 kW a few months ago). Doing simple things like replacing all bulbs with LEDs would likely pay for itself within only a few years and reduce the size of the required array substantially. That kind of consumption tells me that you probably have a lot of gizmos and gadgets, and possibly an extremely old refrigerator (if so, a new one might even for itself within even a year or two). If most of the consumption is during the summer, than your AC is probably old and very inefficient. If your furnace is old too, then replacing both with a high-efficiency heat pump (they make them in 22 SEER/13 HSPF configurations nowadays) could be very sane since it converts a winter gas bill into an electric one that can be offset with solar PV (I'm planning on doing this soon). If you have a south-facing roof with a 40-50˚ pitch, that's perfect for levelized year-round production in case you don't have yearly net metering or if it ever goes away.

Can you sell power back to the grid in NM?

Yep!

[Pointedstick]

Think of it this way: let's say you replace an old SEER 10 AC with a new SEER 20 unit (Central units go up to 24, even). This will probably cost you $8,000--maybe less if there are utility of government rebates (in NM I'd get $700 off). If that reduces your yearly kWh usage by 6,000, then you only need an 8 kW array, saving you $12,000 off the cost of the PV array after subsidies are taken into account ($17,000 savings without subsidies). The new AC unit literally more then pays for itself when you consider how you can reduce the size of the PV array. And if you make it a heat pump instead of an AC (maybe $1,000 more?), then you get a new heating system thrown into the mix and part of your gas bill turns into an electric bill you can offset with PV and reduce with even more energy efficiency measures. Have you sealed and insulated your crawlspace yet? If you have ducts in the attic, have you encapsulated them entirely within spray foam? Do you have R-60 cellulose insulation on your attic floor?

Of course these numbers are just pulled out of my ass, but the general principle holds.

[Pointedstick]

Oh, you said "units." Let me guess: one for the first floor and one for the second floor, right? And the bottom one has ducts in the crawlspace and the top one is located inside the attic, right? And the roof has dark shingles? Yeah… no wonder you use 1,700 kWh a year!

You know, there might be massive savings replacing both units with a single new unit using ductwork that has per-floor zoning, with the second floor ducts run through the subfloor. Also, do a rough manual-J calculation to determine your house's actual load: http://www.loadcalc.net/

[bedraggled]

If I buy a florida house next year in a new development, can I have the builder install solar? What if the house is completed already? Could I have excess capacity included?

Thanks.

[Pointedstick]

Multiple AC units/furnaces/air handlers in the attic? Okay, that's just ridiculous. Replace them all with a single highest-possible-efficiency heat pump and have the HVAC guy adapt the ductwork to be zoned per floor with motorized dampers, which should be easy if each air handler currently has its own trunk duct. Basically you connect the trunks together with a damper to determine how much flow each zone gets. Then build an insulated box around the air handler with rigid foam (with and an inner-layer of foil-faced mineral wool for fire safety). A huge part of your problem is that your air handlers are in a part of the house that's the exact opposite of the temperature you want for the air they're handling. Especially in summer, an attic becomes an oven. Needless to say, putting an air conditioner in an oven is dumb. American builders are the worst. These practices are just shameful and appalling.

[barrett]

...air conditioners work harder to reduce moisture than they do to reduce temperature...

Ah, I had wondered about that. Here in CT my wife loves to throw open the windows on summer mornings when we get up. We work from/at home a lot so they can stay open for several hours and the humidity really creeps up over the course of the day. Then the AC has to work like crazy the latter part of the day and into the evening.

Alas, our home is on a north/south axis with the west side facing the street and the morning sun on the east side being blocked by trees on summer mornings. All this would seem to rule out solar as a great option for us. It's definitely on our list if/when we move.

Desert, I know this is off topic but don't you just have one kid? From our experience, having a smaller living space (within reason) tends to bring the family physically closer together. That can be a big plus if you, your wife and kid all like each other.

[Mountaineer]

Multiple AC units/furnaces/air handlers in the attic? Okay, that's just ridiculous. Replace them all with a single highest-possible-efficiency heat pump and have the HVAC guy adapt the ductwork to be zoned per floor with motorized dampers, which should be easy if each air handler currently has its own trunk duct. Basically you connect the trunks together with a damper to determine how much flow each zone gets. Then build an insulated box around the air handler with rigid foam (with and an inner-layer of foil-faced mineral wool for fire safety). A huge part of your problem is that your air handlers are in a part of the house that's the exact opposite of the temperature you want for the air they're handling. Especially in summer, an attic becomes an oven. Needless to say, putting an air conditioner in an oven is dumb. American builders are the worst. These practices are just shameful and appalling.

I replaced my HVAC system November 2015 - high effeciency 4 ton AC unit and high efficiency 80,000 BTU gas furnace - both Carrier high end systems. I was debating on a heat pump vs. the AC unit and had a couple of conversations with an AC repair tech (not a salesman) that I've known (and trusted) for several years and told him what I was considering. The heat pump would have cost about $1000 to $1500 more than the equivalent efficiency AC unit. The kicker was when he told me the heat pump would cost more to repair and would only last probably half to 2/3 as long as the AC unit because it would be running much more of the time. Also with the current natural gas prices, I would never have recovered the additional cost of a heat pump. I had to have a gas furnace for back up as our weather get too cold to rely only on a heat pump for heat. You may wish to crank all that into your thinking for whatever it is worth, especially if natural gas is available for your heating requirements. My experience is that fuel sources available in your area, climate - heating and cooling days, and anticipated future fuel costs are a major consideration for what makes most economic sense.

[WiseOne]

...air conditioners work harder to reduce moisture than they do to reduce temperature...

Good to know! My window A/C units weren't doing a great job with reducing humidity, so I got a standalone dehumidifier. I can't check usage because we are not yet submetered, but it definitely looked to me like the A/C compressors were not kicking on as often.

The dehumidifier I got is much more energy efficient than my A/C's are, so that might be something to consider for people stuck with window units. Also, even if it only saves wear and tear on the window units that's worthwhile, because the dehumidifier is a lot easier and cheaper to replace.

[Pointedstick]

If you move to New Mexico I'll happily be the general contractor for your custom house build.

[I Shrugged]

If you move to New Mexico I'll happily be the general contractor for your custom house build.

Are you shooting for getting into home building?

[Pointedstick]

If you move to New Mexico I'll happily be the general contractor for your custom house build.

Are you shooting for getting into home building?

Yes, either sooner or later.

[bedraggled]

Am I correct that solar panels and the entire system are not only less expensive but easier to install?

[Pointedstick]

Am I correct that solar panels and the entire system are not only less expensive but easier to install?

Compared to what?

[Pointedstick]

If you move to New Mexico I'll happily be the general contractor for your custom house build.

I would love to move West, to a drier climate.

Here's the house I need:
1. 1600 sq ft, 3 bedroom, single floor
2. Rear of house facing South for roof-mounted solar
3. 1/4 acre xeriscape "yard"
4. Whole house fan to take advantage of large desert diurnal temp swings
5. Great overall R value

How much would that cost me?

Probably the industry-standard $100/sf, but there are many ways to pay less and get a better result. If I could persuade you to go with a two-story design, that'll both save money and leave room for superior designs and materials in the foundation and roof. For example:

• 1600sf with $8/sf slab foundation and $8/sf shingled truss roof = $25,600
• 800sf with $16/sf full (insulated) basement and $15/sf KingZip insulated metal roofing panel roof = $24,800

And you get an extra 800 square feet of living space in the basement, too! So then maybe we don't need a full-sized second story and we can get away with a space that has low walls and cathedral ceilings (provided by the KingZip panels), saving you money on the second floor wall cost. The second story can be a "children's realm" with two small bedrooms and a large central playroom, and the master bedroom can be on the first floor, providing separation so the parents don't go crazy and can stay in the house when they get old. The rest of the first floor is kitchen + living area, with the basement being a second living area/den/whatever.

We can save money in even more clever ways. For example, instead of wood frame walls, we'll build them out of Durisol. That's expensive, but we can offset that cost by not having any drywall or paint! Instead, when the stucco crew comes to stucco the exterior, we have them do the interior as well, in a nice white lime-gypsum plaster--adding some pigment if desired to give it a more adobe-ish look. Now we only have two subs to manage (general laborers, the stucco/plaster crew) instead of six (framers, insulators, stucco crew, drywall crew, trim carpenters, painters), and that saves us money and time. And the result is a thousand times better: no rot, no mold, no termites, bulletproof, never fades or needs repainting, high-R-value, high thermal lag, incredible acoustical privacy, very little construction waste (= less cleanup cost).

[bedraggled]

PS,

Are solar panels and installation cheaper than 2-3 years ago?

Thanks.

[WiseOne]

We can save money in even more clever ways. For example, instead of wood frame walls, we'll build them out of Durisol. That's expensive, but we can offset that cost by not having any drywall or paint! Instead, when the stucco crew comes to stucco the exterior, we have them do the interior as well, in a nice white lime-gypsum plaster--adding some pigment if desired to give it a more adobe-ish look. Now we only have two subs to manage (general laborers, the stucco/plaster crew) instead of six (framers, insulators, stucco crew, drywall crew, trim carpenters, painters), and that saves us money and time. And the result is a thousand times better: no rot, no mold, no termites, bulletproof, never fades or needs repainting, high-R-value, high thermal lag, incredible acoustical privacy, very little construction waste (= less cleanup cost).

Interesting!!! Are you talking about this for interior walls as well as exterior?

I've got no immediate plans to do so, but at some point I might want to mess with my apartment's layout. Simplifying labor costs is an even bigger deal here in NYC. The wall thickness and weight is a consideration though. Think this would work in an old wood/brick frame apartment building?