Solar cells down to details...

This is the place for any magazine-related discussions that don't fit in any of the column discussion boards below.
Post Reply
ian
Posts: 251
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2002 1:01 am
Location: toronto
Contact:

Re: Solar cells down to details...

Post by ian » Sun Apr 24, 2005 2:50 pm

Tough neighborhood? Hang $50,000 worth of panels in your yard without an alarm system. See what happens.
I asked for a practical system example if you were going to reply, but since you didn't.....
In American dollars lets look at a smaller system<p>A 10' X 10' area of solar panels
$5,000.00 cost of panels
$1,500.00 inverter with grid tie-in
$1,000.00 cables, switches, fuses etc.
$2,500.00 Installation
$FREE 10' X 10' tract of land<p>$10,000.00 Total system cost<p>Yearly costs<p>$1,000.00 maintenance, depreciation etc.
$500.00 interest on loan
$FREE Taxes on land, insurance etc.<p>$1,500.00 per year.
-500.00 savings at the exaggerated $0.35
cents per kWH X the
equally exaggerated 1,500 kWH
generated.
= $1000.00 loss per year

User avatar
jwax
Posts: 2152
Joined: Mon Feb 09, 2004 1:01 am
Location: NY
Contact:

Re: Solar cells down to details...

Post by jwax » Sun Apr 24, 2005 6:17 pm

I see I'm dealing with an accountant mentality here, on a technical forum. We cannot communicate when you persist in pulling numbers from above, like a "free 10" X 10" tract of land", or "$1,000 per year maintenance" of a 100 sq. ft. solar array. Are you kidding?
Articles like this are typical:
http://www.boston.com/business/technolo ... solar_hot/
If you don't care to participate, don't.

ian
Posts: 251
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2002 1:01 am
Location: toronto
Contact:

Re: Solar cells down to details...

Post by ian » Sun Apr 24, 2005 6:44 pm

I'm not kidding at all. Accountant mentality? Because I'm applying real numbers?
Some were pulled from Chris's earlier, unrealistic examples and corrected.
In regards to your suggested website please review my other post about solar power magic tricks.
In regards to a 10' X 10' tract of land, thats the MINIMUM area needed for a 1000 watt system. If the house isn't facing the right way, if you have a treed lot, or you're using a tracker system you'll need a lot more land than 10' X 10' to generate 1000 watts.

User avatar
jwax
Posts: 2152
Joined: Mon Feb 09, 2004 1:01 am
Location: NY
Contact:

Re: Solar cells down to details...

Post by jwax » Sun Apr 24, 2005 7:13 pm


User avatar
Chris Smith
Posts: 4325
Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2001 1:01 am
Location: Bieber Ca.

Re: Solar cells down to details...

Post by Chris Smith » Sun Apr 24, 2005 9:46 pm

Ian, [No offence intended] we can put your myths to rest real easy.<p>1) Replacement of bad, failing solar cells.
2) The cost of borrowing $100,000 for 20 years.
2a) After buying a $200,000 house who has another
$100,000 for a solar system?
3) The cost of insurance for the cells against
theft, wind, storms, vandalism, etc.
4) The cost of a support system, cables
batteries, inventors, power switching etc.
5) Support structures, house re-inforcing.
6) Land.
7) Alarms system for $50,000 worth of panels in
your backyard.
8) Replacement batteries and parts. This one
especially cracks me up, most pro-solar
luddites assume nothing in a solar system
ever fails.
9) Regular maintenance, cleaning the cells,
checking the system etc.<p>
*******************************
1] there are no batteries.<p>2] the cost of the cell is only relevant to the production line cost, IF we choose to start that assembly line into production, the price drops.
The myth that what it costs today, is the sole reason we should not proceed, is a head in the sand approach. The Model T got off the assembly line at a cost of 600 dollars, because they said IT couldn’t be done, or so they told henry ford. He did it any way, dropping the cost per unit car by almost ten times. <p>3] thus the replacement cost, like the assembly cost, drops with every new purchase. You can not base solar simply by what todays prices are, as this does not enter into fact, major mass sales.

4] borrowing 200 grand? For what a brothel, certainly not solar cells at their true cost. A buck a square foot when you make a billion squares a year would be the real price, based on todays actual cost of materials. <p>5] Insurance? For what, a glass window on your roof? Vandalism, really, how many windows you lost this year? <p>6]Inverters, cheap as china?<p>7]Support structures, Your Roof is already there. <p>8] Land, you mean your yard? Why, your roof will do just fine. <p>9] Alarms? Chicken little is on the way, he wants your solar panels, instead of his?

10] did I mention there are NO batteries? Try reading the whole post, not just the parts you object to? <p>11] Maintenance? A car wash every couple of years or just a garden hose, glass is soo hard to clean? and then perhaps the maid, does windows? <p>10) Have I left anything out? Yes, everything relevent.<p>The problem still remains..... Ignorance, myth, and greed. <p>But it can and will survive, regardless. <p>And yes, you left out everything that was relevant, but your myths will not go Unrewarded or wasted as it will serve others and help others learn, what is NOT a real problem with Solar. <p>And as to heating a house, consumption and the 200 amp service? <p>How many kilo watts do you use, the only relevant number that you need to produce during day light hours, to supplement your bill. 10% or 100% is better than feeding the arabs, with caviar.

Heating bills, 60 grand wont cover it?<p> My neighbors house uses five bucks worth of electricity per month, keeping his house warm all winter.<p> And we get American temperatures down to minus 27, thats not Canadian temps, [like your discounted dollars] that F. <p>So what’s five bucks worth of electricity? <p>A solar water heater could do that, or three candles. <p>You heard? Another 16th century invention, insulation. <p>Did I mention NO batteries?<p>[ April 24, 2005: Message edited by: Chris Smith ]</p>

rshayes
Posts: 1286
Joined: Tue Mar 04, 2003 1:01 am
Contact:

Re: Solar cells down to details...

Post by rshayes » Mon Apr 25, 2005 12:09 am

The web site referred to by jwax starts off "Solar panels and solar power products...at guaranteed lowest prices on the planet!".<p>For a 3.06 KW system:
Components $14,759
Installation $ 3,200<p> Total $17,959<p>This works out to $5.87 per watt of peak power.
The effective number of hours per year is 2790 hours at most (no clouds or rain). The most that this system can deliver is 8537 KWH.<p>At 13.1 cents per KWH, what I was actually billed last month, this system will pay back less than $1,118.35 per year. This breaks even at about 16 years (if there are no cloudy days). If I try to pay for the system by selling power back to the power company, I would receive 2.6 cents per KWH, and the payback would be $221.96 per year. This breaks even in about 81 years. If the system lasted 20 years, I might make a net profit of $4473.40 on an investment of $17,959. This is a return of 1.1 percent per year. Four or five rainy days a year would entirely wipe out my profit. This doesn't even add in the factors that ian mentioned.<p>Solar cells have been under development for 50 years and they are already in mass production. Any drop in price due to larger scale production will probably be very small. The materials are expensive and this will set a lower limit on cost.<p>That $600 Model T was built with steel that cost about $35 per ton. Most of the cost was labor, and Henry Ford reduced that as much as possible by developing special purpose machinery.<p>And let's have a little basic honesty about Chris's neighbor. He isn't using electricity for heating. He's probably burning about $300 per month of forest products in a wood stove or fireplace.

User avatar
Chris Smith
Posts: 4325
Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2001 1:01 am
Location: Bieber Ca.

Re: Solar cells down to details...

Post by Chris Smith » Mon Apr 25, 2005 1:03 am

Thank you for your extended myths.<p>Again, you seem fixated on todays prices, where there is NO mass production, which makes it a myth.<p> When we produce solar cells like we do donuts, by the billion, all your numbers become a figure that is worthy of chicken little, perhaps, but only at a stretch. <p>“And let's have a little basic honesty about Chris's neighbor. He isn't using electricity for heating. He's probably burning about $300 per month of forest products in a wood stove or fireplace” <p>The seven inch walls on my friends home requires no heating, or cooling, except five bucks each month for the built in electric furnace, and no wood stoves, and no gas stoves were installed, so another myth of yours bites the dust.<p> Not even my place which has the front door wide open 24/7/365 with a heavy curtain for the dogs to come and go at will, uses 1/10 of what you propose. <p>My heater unfortunately doesn’t go any lower, and it can and has been known to use a whopping two dollars a day, when Im not watching my self. In fact I have to open the back door and let in the cold, just to sleep. And my place was built in 1954.<p>“Solar cells have been under development for 50 years and they are already in mass production. Any drop in price due to larger scale production will probably be very small. The materials are expensive and this will set a lower limit on cost” <p>The materials are not expensive, and I have worked in a place that used a very expensive material compared to electronics, that also cost pennies per square surface foot of material, when deposited in the layers necessary to do the job, and we produced square feet after square feet of these products for pennies per copy, and even paid the rent on the 14 acre plant, labor, water, taxes, 2 million dollar water treatment plant, and electricity included. <p>“That $600 Model T was built with steel that cost about $35 per ton. Most of the cost was labor, and Henry Ford reduced that as much as possible by developing special purpose machinery” <p>It was called “Mass Production”. I worked in a 14 acre plant, that mass produced several hundred thousand products per shift.
Our penny cost products retailed for over 60 bucks on the market, while Ford paid a mere 15 bucks for what cost us 5 cents in plastic, and another penny’s worth of metal.
And 20 cents worth of automated labor. <p>
It amazes me that there is more myths here than facts, more chicken little than a realistic market approach. What your really trying to say is you believe what they are telling you so lets all give up, give in to the oil market that wont be here tomorrow, and let them screw you at every chance. Time to wean the power junkies. <p>A dollar a square foot is possible today, materials and labor. Retail sales is extra.

User avatar
jwax
Posts: 2152
Joined: Mon Feb 09, 2004 1:01 am
Location: NY
Contact:

Re: Solar cells down to details...

Post by jwax » Mon Apr 25, 2005 3:23 am

I quote from the website:
"And qualify for a cash rebate. For example, in California buy a complete 3.06 peak DC kW (3060 DC Watt Peak) solar system, including top of the line Mitsubishi solar panels, inverter, racks, wire, MC connectors and disconnect from us for only $14,759.00 and get a $7,087.45 cash rebate and a 7.5% tax credit from the State!"
Now a quote from New York State-
NYSERDA Cash Incentives for Small Solar Electric or PV Systems<p>The New York State Energy Research and Development Authority (NYSERDA), through the New York State Energy $mart™ program, is providing incentives of $4.00 to $4.50 per watt for the installation of approved, grid-connected, PV systems up to 50kW. Under the NYSERDA program, cash incentives are only available for PV systems purchased through an eligible installer.<p>$4/watt at 3 KW, is a state rebate of $12,000. Cash back.<p>And you have this opinion while paying this per liter of gasoline?
www.gasticker.com:
April 24th, 2005 08:39 PM 80.0 cents per litre
April 23rd, 2005 01:35 PM 91.5 cents per litre
April 22nd, 2005 10:25 AM 80.9 cents per litre
April 20th, 2005 04:06 PM 88.6 cents per litre
April 19th, 2005 08:03 AM 76.0 cents per litre
April 18th, 2005 11:54 AM 99.0 cents per litre
($CN)

ian
Posts: 251
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2002 1:01 am
Location: toronto
Contact:

Re: Solar cells down to details...

Post by ian » Mon Apr 25, 2005 7:51 am

Normally I don't argue with solar panel advocates because logic, common sense, and the truth fly out the window when they talk, and this thread is a perfect example. The reason I'm posting here is because it's a public forum and I think it's an important issue. Lets look at some of the current lunacy...........<p>"Rebates".....
So the taxpayers pay for the system and that makes it viable? The stupidity of this argument is obvious.<p>"Solar panels would be cheaper in volume."
No matter what facts are posted this is what Chris keeps repeating like a mantra. Chris, I'm dealing with current reality, not YOUR prediction of future economics. And I'll add that you haven't backed up your conspiracy theory with a whit of fact or reference. Hundreds of billions have been poured into nuclear power research and the price of that keeps going UP!<p>"I only spend $5 on heating"
Why the F would you buy a $10,000.00 solar panel system then? Also are you making the retarded statement his house stays at 72 degrees regardless of the outside temperatures?
Absolute bullshit!<p>"You don't need land."
SOME may not need land, if you have a roof facing south, or a big yard. What if you're like MOST people who have a small house that doesn't face south and has a small back yard, with trees? <p>"You don't need an alarm"
If your panel isn't on your roof you better have an alarm.<p>"The other choice is to give up and buy oil"
Completely retarded statement. I'm not even saying don't buy solar panels, I just think you should be realistic about the savings. There are other things you could do with $10,000 that would save a lot more energy than solar panels would provide.<p>"There are NO BATTERIES"
So you shift the storage costs onto the utility?
Do that on mass scale and see where that goes.<p>"A kWH of power is 35 cents."
Har har har<p> Guys, I'm actually pro solar. But you're posting a system will pay for itself in 1-5 years under ideal conditions. Give it a rest will ya?
Solar panels are a big loss right now, about a factor of 10 from being viable. Stop the bullshit ok?

ian
Posts: 251
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2002 1:01 am
Location: toronto
Contact:

Re: Solar cells down to details...

Post by ian » Mon Apr 25, 2005 9:54 am

Ok jwax, lets take a pseudo-realistic look at your system using your numbers and your assumptions. 3KW peak eh? Mounted on a roof? It never breaks down, never gets stolen, lasts forever, no financing costs, $12,000 cash rebate, $2,000 install cost, it's always clean for maximum power, etc.
The system cost you $17,000 with tax and installation, -$12,000 for a total system cost of $5,000.00.

So it's not directly angled toward the sun on either angle, one moment out of the year you'll get peak power when the sun is at the right tropic angle and directly overhead. Other times of the year the sun will be lower or higher, and during each day the sun will be angled side to side.<p>A 3KW "peak" system will generate about an average of 425 watt/hours per day in this configuration. Thats 156kWH per year. Lets say you pay 20 cents per kWH for a yearly savings of $31.00.
IN 161 YEARS THE SYSTEM WILL PAY FOR ITSELF!

User avatar
jwax
Posts: 2152
Joined: Mon Feb 09, 2004 1:01 am
Location: NY
Contact:

Re: Solar cells down to details...

Post by jwax » Mon Apr 25, 2005 9:59 am

Like I said, "If you don't like it, don't participate"! You're obviously well-versed in BS.
Perhaps all you say is true from where you are coming from. (Solar panel theft, $1K/yr maintenance, rebates don't count, no yard, etc.)
Solar power is viable, and it matters to some of US. We chose to participate.

ian
Posts: 251
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2002 1:01 am
Location: toronto
Contact:

Re: Solar cells down to details...

Post by ian » Mon Apr 25, 2005 10:35 am

How ironic. I use YOUR numbers, YOUR premises, I don't include theft, breakdown etc. You post a reply saying that I did, then YOU accuse ME of BS!
Like I said, logic and truth, right out the window!

ian
Posts: 251
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2002 1:01 am
Location: toronto
Contact:

Re: Solar cells down to details...

Post by ian » Mon Apr 25, 2005 11:49 am

OOPS! Let me make a math correction........
A 3KW "peak" system will generate about an average of 10,200 watt/hours per day in this configuration. Thats 3723kWH per year. Lets say you pay 10 cents per kWH for a yearly savings of $372.00.
IN 14 YEARS THE SYSTEM WILL PAY FOR ITSELF!
That's better. Still not viable, but at that price everybody should be installing one of these.
That is, if the state doesn't go bankrupt subsidizing them.

User avatar
Chris Smith
Posts: 4325
Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2001 1:01 am
Location: Bieber Ca.

Re: Solar cells down to details...

Post by Chris Smith » Mon Apr 25, 2005 1:59 pm

Ian, It must be nice to be so young and innocent of how the real world works? <p>Your insisting today, and only today's price is relevant because we have no resolve as humans, leaders of the free world that brought us to the moon and back, so we cant possibly solve the oil problem with solar? It cost too much? <p>That’s pretty much your take on reality? <p>We have had myopic people just like you through out our history, and if they had their way we would still be living with the concept of horse and buggy for transportation, but our Amish live in isolated communities and they enjoy their religion in peace with out cars or even electricity, in the North east United states, while the rest of us move on with vision.<p>Other than this small group of nay sayers, we moved on to Rural electrification, dams, and even highways, and WE the people all paid for it. <p>There was no loss or burden by us because IT was a national priority, and it was funded by the government, which is the people, as it should be.<p> When we cant fight any more wars for OIL, we will also be in the same position as before with a great need for power. <p>We will have the national need for energy, and we as a nation will solve it like we do everything else. <p>We will rebate, we will have tax breaks, incentives, and we will mass produce, and we will lower the market costs, and no myths will be invited. <p>The only thing we as a people have to do is keep pushing our representatives into doing the right thing, as they like to squawk at doing the right thing. They always do, like when hover dam was being built. <p>Try a class in economics before your next post, when more people buy the same thing, the market drives the Price and cost down, not up. <p>The only thing that drive the market up is small purchases, and basic greed. <p>Why would my neighbor who only spends five bucks on heating need a solar panel? <p>Gee, you could try to not be so myopic, as your “heating excuse” for keeping the arabs rich isn’t working. <p>Lets see, there is lighting, and then his work shop uses electricity, and they even own a TV or two, and a computer, and all these things require a one way money thing, OUT, where as a solar panel offsets this cost, and cuts down on Arab consumption of caviar. Sounds like a winner to me? <p>So there is what, four or five reasons past your myopia and I didnt even try. <p>Southern roof not needed. <p>You assume every one MUST produce the max amount of electricity. <p>They don’t. Were a team, and we produce as a nation. Some better than others, and ALL leading to the weaning of foreign oil.<p>
And your $10,000 figure for gloom and doom is worthless. Do you know what one utility pole in the street cost to put up, and the 10 bucks a foot for wire that they charge is a NATIONAL thing. <p>If you want to create dooms day scenarios where we rely on the arabs for oil til the last day and drop, your on the right path. <p>Other than that, thanks for sharing your less than educated myopic views. And remember it cant be done, if you fix your mind on it because you will never try.

User avatar
sofaspud
Posts: 531
Joined: Wed Feb 13, 2002 1:01 am
Location: San Antonio, TX
Contact:

Re: Solar cells down to details...

Post by sofaspud » Mon Apr 25, 2005 2:47 pm

Myopic??
Insurance was scoffed at, but wouldn't you want it for fire and hail protection, if not for thieves and vandals?
Henry Ford didn't sell $350 automobiles simply because he made lots of them. Didn't he also do things like demand that suppliers ship parts in wooden boxes? The wood was then used to make the floorboards, and charcoal briquets.
The USGS estimates that oil reserves will last a century at current usage levels. Ever hear the theory held by Thomas Gold? If he's correct, oil supplies will last much more than that.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 10 guests