On the Cost of Solar Panels

there are many types of solar panels, with different purposes.

photo-voltaic (PV)
solar-gas (air)
solar-fluid (water/glycol)

and optical amplifiers with increase the gathering area (lenses and mirrors)

which were you referring to?

Chris

PV panels / modules. Solar Panel is the common term for them.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_panel

Quoting the Wiki - not the perfect reference though the easiest one. The Wiki merely represents the opinion of the last person that cared to take time to edit the entry - except for those that are locked.

Solar thermal panels are also solar panels.

It's the technology. At the present efficiency levels of prodution solar panels even if the active solar energy conversion elements were free it would still take years to return your investment by the time you get done mounting them in frames, installing them and wiring up the controls and electrical distribution stuff. So to get a reasonable life out of them even more costly stuff is needed to get them to the point of being able to give you AC energy for enough years to make you want to go solar. So there is an exponential effect there. That's what sells the politicians on giving government subsidies. But what underlies that gamble is that technology will eventually provide better efficiencies.

Ed Weldon

Hi Ed,

Around here a few farmers and land owners that can afford and are willing to drop $125,000 - 150,000 US into the equipment are giving up a few acres to build 66Kw solar farms. The current data (which I have only briefly perused) indicates about a ten year return on their investment, with help in the form of premiums paid on production. This is facilitated by a partnership with Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA). For a period of 10 years, TVA pays a premium for the green energy, after that it is market price. TVA desperately needs this green energy to offset the carbon tax. We burn a lot of coal.

Even with grants to help offset the high installation cost (Is $100,000 high enough to warrant a parallel thread 'On the Installation Cost of Solar Panels') only a few have done this. Even though the math looks good, it probably still appears very speculative to conservative land owners because they may not fully understand the technology. The production rates of 10 year old panels times the market rate in ten years should be pure profit. But could they make more money producing crops on that acreage? What about maintenance and repairs? I believe the grant/subsidies/premiums not only contribute to the financial feasibility of these projects, but also help instill some confidence that this investment is not stupid.

The size of the arrays help justify the cost of the grid tie/metering equipment. The array's themselves are pretty sweet too, solar tracking, web-based data on all panels and their current and historic (hourly, daily, etc.) production rates. The presentation of the data is convenient, detailed, and easily understood.

If I had the resources to do this, I would, only I would have to do the installation myself (just for the fun of it, though saving 100 grand would be nice too!).

If you haven't yet purchased any solar panels, why not? Think carefully about that, and then extend your thinking to other folks.

The cost and the availability. I am from/live in India, people here aren't rich enough to have huge spaces outside their homes or own their own cars. The technologies of this sort can really help if they became less costly, and more efficient.

I just purchased 4 sets of panels/batteries, and was quite impressed with the low price of the panels- roughly half of what the same panels were selling for two years ago.

The kicker was that the batteries were nearly three times the cost of the panels.

The industry is scamming you when they talk about "impoving" solar panel efficiency or lowering the cost. That is not where the major cost of a system is. You could give the panels away for free, and it still would be hard to recover your installation costs within the expected life time of your batteries...

Well I didn't put it correctly at the start then. Basically my question was about what makes the whole technology (including the batteries, the panels etc) of this so costly. Renewable, sustainable energy has been the talk for so many years now, but its sadly still a far way behind more conventional sources like fuels, due to its ineffiency.

While I can consider inefficiency apart, I am not sure I completely understand what makes them so costly.

You have to study what goes into the panels - PV panels are not simple items and the price has been going down sharply the past years. Competition is a wonderful thing.

I understand that. My question was intended to get replies on the cost the type of technologies bring to the solar panels and things that go with it (due to their cost price itself).

Solar thermal panels are expensive - low tech = manufacturers gouging and not much competition.

Solar PV panels are expensive - more high tech involved - expensive manufacturing process = manufacturers can't gouge much due to competition - panels are available at under 2.00$ per DC watt today. Installed system cost (many places) should be in the 5$ to 5.50$ range.

Other expenses for solar PV are the inverter racking and installation

For off grid batteries are a major expense and must be replaced every 5 to 10 years.

Solar power technologies are best suited for Space vehicles, satellite & space stations since the energy sources are remote for those applications.

Low energy systems like lighting, water heating are useful applications of solar power on ground.

To be successful for a long term usage, the energy source should be consistently available, non seasonal, as well as the extraction of energy should be simplified.

Strangely Solar, wind power, tidal wave energies are dominating the renewable energy scenario. They can be alternates, but fail on sustainability and large scale deployment potential on grounds of economy.

Increasing land costs and land abuse are contributions of wind and solar systems.

Rather the energy/ power world is badly in need of a rescue technology to safe guard the interests of the end user community

Here is news item which has appeared in local news paper "The Economic Times" dt5/27/11. I hope you will find it interesting :-

'Cost of Solar Power to Drop Sharply'

BRIAN WINGFIELD WASHINGTON

Solar power may be cheaper than electricity generated by fossil fuels and nuclear reactors within three to five years because of innovations, said Mark M Little, the global research director for General Electric. "If we can get solar at 15 cents a kilowatt-hour or lower, which I'm hopeful we will, you're going to have a lot of people that are going to want to have solar at home," Little said on Wednesday in an interview in Bloomberg's Washington office. The 2009 average US retail rate per kilowatthour for electricity ranges from 6.1 cents in Wyoming to 18.1 cents in Connecticut, according to Energy Information Administration data released in April.

GE, based in Fairfield, Connecticut, announced in April that it had boosted the efficiency of thinfilm solar panels to a record 12.8%. Improving efficiency, or the amount of sunlight converted to electricity, would help reduce the costs without relying on subsidies.

The thin-film panels will be manufactured at a plant that GE intends to open in 2013. The company said in April that the factory will have about 400 employees and make enough panels each year to power about 80,000 homes. - Bloomberg

Check this out http://www.premiumpower.com especially the 45.

Interesting - wonder what the cost is.

From the site, "Our products are lower in cost than lead acid batteries up front and roughly equivalent to pumped hydro, at under 2 cents/kWh, on a long-term basis..."

Lower cost than storage AND generation...Something is not compatible here. The site totally lacks anything even remotely resembling a technical description of the basic technology, and they seem to want to sell these in multiples of 100kWhr capacity.

Yes, interesting, but I would like to see more technical information and less marketing hype...

The one clue I found was a bar graph that showed the 15 and 30 year costs of various battery technologies. (The graph clearly showed other batteries of other technologies being replaced periodically.)

The costs ranged from about $20,000 for 30 years of life (for this zinc technology) to $100,000. I don't recall seeing anything to say what unit size they were talking about, but I'm assuming it was for the 45 kw unit.

A 45 kw unit might be in the ballpark for typical home use--if you used 45 kwhr every day, that would be about 16,000 kwhrs / year. (If in addition to that, for 6 hours a day you used power "directly from" your PV panels in addition to recharging the zinc cell, you could support a significanly higher usage (with some days limited due to overcast conditions).

As far as amortizing a $20,000 up front cost over 30 years, I might assume a 6% interest rate and be looking at something like $110/month. (Just to have something to think about--I didn't use a financial calculator ;-). That would equate to about $0.0825 per kwhr. for storage costs. (Assuming the system actually lasts 30 years.)

Not totally out of the ballpark, depending on the costs of the PV collectors themselves and your local cost of electricity.

As far as how this technology works, I (or you ;-) might google on something like [zinc fuel cell].

Just reading this made me wonder what other technologies might be available for home storage of energy. I wonder how much energy could be stored (and how efficiently) in a poor man's pumped storage facility. Rig some 55 gallon barrels in your attic, some others in the basement--you might get close to 25' of head.

Of course, you'd have to avoid overloading the attic. Maybe in all but freezing weather do it outside, or use antifreeze in winter...

Now I'll have to dig into that.

Hmm, doesn't look very promising. Using the calculation at Hydropower Energy calculations and GPM-PSI Unit conversions as a model, (and for the sake of a calculation, assuming I get a flow of 55 GPM for 1 minute, I think I store something like 16 watts in a 55 gallon drum 25' above grade).

Even if I'm off by a couple of orders of magnitude, it doesn't look useful.

You are close enough - everyone thinks it would be great but it is a total loser.

Same for flywheels, weights and a few other things - a new type of battery is needed .

This fellow has a neat lowbuck way to build a hot water storage tank:

http://www.builditsolar.com/Experimental/PEXColDHW/Overview.htm#TankHX

Nickel-iron is old batterry technology. Requires a bit of a commitment to build the system and provide for long term use and maintenance. 20-30 tyear life can be expected.

http://www.nickel-iron-battery.com/

Beutilityfree is the only outfit in the USA I know of that sells the nickel-iron batteries. Not cheap!! I think they import them from China one container load at a time and take some weeks to build a sales list. The Chinese manufacturer seems to be the only one in the biz. I suspect they have figured out how to economically produce the special iron required. What's special about the iron I can only guess. Probably has to do with chemical purity and possible the correct form and microstructure. Proprietary stuff and they aren't talking.

My research has suggested that there may also be a Russian source for Nickel-Iron batteries, but I have not been able to track it down. If it exists, they don't seem to be exporting...

The original nickel-iron battery was a Henry Ford patent- produced in the US until Exide bought the last manufacturer (I believe some time in the late 50's or early 60's) and shut them down...

One Chinese company is http://www.changhongbattery.com/

Just much more expensive than lead acid - one green guy on our site said he used them as he refused to have lead acid batteries due to environmental concerns - some people don't recycle them - a bit of a loony.

Another company for NiFe batteries

The Iron Edison Battery Company, LLC
10171 W. 9th Dr.

Lakewood, CO 80215

http://ironedison.com/

"There have been others who have successfully used other methods for energy storage, but we still come back to the matter of basic cost."

What are the other methods used for storage?

Jay - this is not a direct reply to your question posed to Jim Wright. Just a bit of rambling and blue sky dreaming by me while we bat around the broader aspects of a solar energy "system".

We've talked in the past on CR-4 about pumped water storage. You need fairly specialized conditions of location for a big enough reservoir of sufficient elevation. For a homeowner or small agricultural enterprise the amount of water pumped and run back through the water turbine involves relatively small hardware that limits total system efficiency down into the 40-50% range. The efficiencies of pumps and turbines for pumped storage go up substantially when they are a size appropriate for a small town or large industrial operation.

Another specialized storage method would be as compressed air to serve a small maintenance or manufacturing facility that is otherwise faced with high electric rates such as tier 4 in California (just lowered by the PUC to 33.3 cents/KWH). In CA the electric companies are still limited to crediting you at tier 1 (12.2 cents/KWH) if you run the meter backwards. This arrangement is still going to be a long payback if the air tanks have to be purchased new.

Blue sky dreaming into the future sees a possibility of using surplus electric power as part of a process of converting biomass locally on a small scale into propane or butane. Compress it back into an existing LPG storage tank where it would be available to run a generator for emergency electric service, peak shaving as well as building climate control and other high efficiency heating devices like dryers and ovens. Like the storage methods I mentioned above this one depends a lot on the existance of a tiered electric rate structure or an "off grid" situation to justify capital and fixed costs.

Ed Weldon

One method that I read about was from a guy back east (I don't remember his exact location and that is not really important. He used a combination of small wind and solar PV panels to liberate hydrogen from water and then pumped the hydrogen into tanks such as the ones used for propane storage. He then used the hydrogen to run generators. He stated in his article that his next step was to replace the motor generators with fuel cell technology. He was also fueling his vehicle with the hydrogen using the same mixer valve technology that you would use for natural gas while leaving the ability to use normal gasoline if necessary. The author stated that his only real challenge was when he wanted to go off grid and the local inspector at first objected to the hydrogen being stored, but when he pointed out that the hydrogen tanks were no more of a hazard than some of the other residents who had propane tanks of similar size in the same neighborhood they dropped their objections. I haven't don't much further investigation or research, but the idea seems interesting. I do know for a fact that at this present time battery technology is not up to the task for residential and certainly not for vehicle use.

Do your research, or use that of others, and you will very quickly find out that is horribly cost ineffective.

That clown was most likely trying to hustle a book or entire systems off on the public.

Using the same mixer valve as for LPG? Fuel values are grossly different!

He got it by an inspector? Either he was lying or the inspector was totally stupid. Please do not compare handling/storing H2 & LPG - two very different animals with different considerations.

Did the guy back east talk about efficiency at all? Or how much area of solar and wind collectors he used to get how much power?

My understanding of hydrogen is that it will diffuse (i.e., leak) through most metals that might be used to store the hydrogen. So, long term storage at any pressure would be a problem, and a bigger problem at higher pressures.

Also, if stored inside, you'd create an explosion / fire hazard.

Hi Jim,

One of the best solutions would be to just stop trying to store it. Sell it! (I would still retain some emergency battery power) Why wait for "the breakthrough" in battery technology. More grid-tie component manufacturers and higher volume sales resulting in lower cost equipment is a realistic goal, and an eventuality that could be accelerated with incentives and standardized, simplified codes for permitting/installation/regulation. This technology is here today. I figure if the coal fired steam plant only burns 18,000 tons of coal a day instead of 20,000 tons, we're heading in the right direction. Isn't more renewable, less fossil what we are trying to do anyway. People are not going to be removing their service entrances just because they get a few solar panels. If someone has a few panels or a few acres of panels, they will benefit in proportion to their investment. Selling any surplus power during peak usage periods and using lower costs electricity from the grid at night could be financially beneficial to ones who invest in PV arrays, eliminate losses of storage, and forestall building larger power plants to meet peak demands.

Like it or not, the US government is already in the power generation business. This is not a free enterprise system. I can't choose where I buy my electricity or what rate I pay. My choices are on or off. Whether they spend several billion on emission controls for existing power plants or the same amount subsidizing distributed renewable energy generation should be based on cost/benefit analysis tempered by doing what is right for our children and their children, not what is profitable. Strip mining is profitable, conservation usually cost something. We have a great free enterprise system, and it works wonderfully and without conscience. I just expect a lot more from our elected officials.

It pays to shop around. I'm currently looking at having a PV solar system installed. So far I've got two quotes. The first one definitely looked about 30% high. The second one looks much more reasonable. I think you are correct, some installers will try to take that 30%. Some are happy with just a portion of it.

I've also looked into the cost of doing the system myself. While some PV panels have dropped drastically in price, nearly 50% in the past 6 months, the more efficient panels have not. I think the big reason for that is the demand for the more efficient panels. Efficiency relates to space used and space available for the panels, therefore, if you don't have a large roof area, you want the most efficient panels. Most people don't have a humongous roof area and so increase the demand for these panels.

One other item to note, all of the installers that I've talked to would rather install a backup generator than install batteries. They've all cited the cost of the batteries as being too high to be worth it.

You can buy first class high efficiency panels for around 2$ US - you can also pay more if you want Sanyo for example.

The difference in space required for 1 kW of 16% efficiency panels or 17% efficiency panels will rarely be a concern.

Thin film - yes they have maybe 50% of the efficiency of mono or poly crystaline panels- then you are talking about space.

If you have batteries then you do need a generator also - not maintaining them properly charged kills them.

The recommendation every time is to go grid connect with a generator - much cheaper. Only if the grid is not available or somebody is on a survival trip do battery based systems come in.

Batteries have to be replaced sometime in the future as well as pushing up the initial cost.

Regarding efficiency, I mean the difference between some of the cheapest Polycrystalline panels and the best Monocrystalline units. Now you're talking 10% or less versus 17%. That can make a big difference on a small roof.

I don't think I've seen any of the high efficiency panels (e.g. sunpower, sanyo, etc.) for less than $4 per watt. Compare that to the $1.59 & $1.79 you mention. Again, if you're short on space, the higher efficiency panels may be worth it.

I'm confused about the concentration on converting to ac from solar power sources. If it costs $2,000 to invert solar power to ac why don't we look at ways of using the raw dc instead. The average office and home is filled with computers and equipment which all operate on dc with all the losses and heat generation associated with the conversion from ac. Modern lighting systems such as LED use dc so the savings in cost by using the solar power even with a battery back-up must be considerable. Even heavy machinery for locomotives, aircraft systems and vehicles use dc so the technology is available, reliable and will come down in cost if demand is there.

Perhaps we are all looking at the wrong end of the problem and should concentrate more on using as much of our own solar power as possible on site and only using the public supply for stuff the solar power can't handle.

Good point, and I think quite a few people that are looking into doing their own installation are thinking along those lines. (I haven't talked to many commercial suppliers of systems, but my impression is that they don't want to fool around at that level--they'd have to be involved in things like rewiring of houses and supplying appliances designed to work on (low voltage) DC.

(Although, I / we shouldn't rule out connecting solar panels in series to get higher voltage DC (I mean, like in the range of 110 to 220 volts) to perhaps run appliances that need it (only if they have a universal motor, which is not very common AFAIK).

Think about how many refrigerators, washers, dryers, dishwashers, etc. are designed to use low voltage DC. And, when you find any, compare their cost to those designed to work at 110 VAC. And see if any of those use universal (i.e., AC/DC motors).

One thing that I don't know to what extent it's been looked into--putting more solar panels / batteries in series to get voltages like 120 VDC, and then building an inverter to work at that voltage. Maybe more expensive semiconductors, but *maybe* less losses. (I don't know if the typical 12 VDC to 120 VAC inverters typically use transformers / coils.)

Another possibility would be a "rotary converter", i.e., use a 12 VDC motor (fairly large) to drive a 120 VAC alternator, or even overspeed an induction motor to use as a generator. I'm sure you could do that for quite a bit less than $2000, not counting any safety circuitry that the utility would require if you wanted to connect to the grid. (I'd keep it close to the solar panels to minimize power loss through the 12 volt cables (or to minimize size of the 12 volt cables).)

(Maybe the $2000 for an inverter includes some or all of the necessary safety equipment. For those that don't know, you don't want to be responsible for killing a lineman because of the (back)feed from your home generation. Oh, but iirc, if you overdrive an induction motor, I believe it will stop generating if you lose the connection to the grid. (But maybe its only that, from a stopped condition, it won't start generating without a connecction to the grid--better find out for sure before trying it.))

Power from the panels to the inverter is often up to 600 VDC - the limit as per NEC - done due to cable size requirements/cost

A DC distribution system is fine - providing the cable runs are short - long runs mean expensive cable to limit voltage loss. DC appliances are considerably more expensive from what I understand. Rewiring a house is not at all cheap.

Only offgrid installations use 12 volt DC - it presents many difficulties and no benefits - as is today.

Anything connected to the grid has to be UL (or equivalent) approved - shade tree mechanic arrangements need not apply.

Few people are talking about making a DC house - maybe we see one talking about it in 6 months.

Motorhomes are DC. A close look at how they are set up should provide insight into what is practical and manufactured in cost saving quantities applicable to the off grid home. To what extent can the propane fuel applications in the motorhome be replaced with solar energy in a fixed as opposed to mobile dwelling?

We in the West are accustomed to a fairly lavish standard of living with respect to our homes. Such a standard is generally regarded as unsustainable for much of our planet's population. Most of the Earth's population lives in spaces comparable in size to our US motorhomes. So perhaps a closer look there will be instructive and illuminate the areas where innovation needs to take place.

To me these consist of comfort heating, hot water heating, cooking and refrigeration. And the biggest problems, as we have been discussing, are in the area of energy storage for times when the sun isn't shining. In sub tropical and many temperate climates the first two are handily (and inexpensively) dealt with using hot water storage. Cooking has always required some kind of fuel. Use of solar ovens is possible but as an auxiliary in all but desert areas where the sun shines most of the year. Refrigeration is a complex subject; but to me the bottom line is that our Western standards of living allow far more lavish use of refrigeration for food storage than is really needed. Air conditioning is really not needed where home construction is allowed to adapt to the actual climate conditions. (most of the world outside densely populated cities)

Just some food for thought here...... And nightmares for building inspectors and city planning departments.

A side note here: Yesterday I heard a news report that the mayor of a tornado wrecked midwestern US town (not Joplin, MO) announced that he will not allow FEMA temporary trailer homes because they have become in other disaster areas an unacceptable blight(my word) lasting for years in residential neighborhoods. Uh huh.... say "no" to homes actually suitable for people to live in. "Not in my back yard!"

We have a long way to go. .........Ed Weldon

Simple answer. AC can be transmitted much further distances with less loss vs. DC. So if you're still connected to the grid you need the AC when the sun isn't shining. You said you have DC computers, I've never seen a PC that was DC. Electronics need a pure sine wave or they don't work well (don't buy a cheap inverter that isn't pure sine wave). In todays world your oven, tv, dishwasher, computer etc all are designed to run AC. To switch over to all DC would be costly and wasteful. But I certainly wouldn't rule out a transition to all DC in the future, just not yet.

A desktop computer has a power supply inside that converts AC to 12, 5 & 3 volts DC,

most laptops, printers & LCD tvs run on around 20 volts DC

anything with a wall wart probably runs on DC from converters that run all the time

the magnetron from a microwave outputs high voltage DC

that doesn't mean it is economically viable to set up a DC household...

everything that use large amounts of power, probably has a big AC motor:

air conditioners, refrigerators, dishwashers, waterpumps & the like

Fredski-

If you look inside your computer, you will see that there is a big power supply that does nothing but convert the AC power from the wall socket to DC (typically 5 V and 12 V). This is a major source of heat inside the computer box as well- back in the days of slower processors, it was generally the only part of the computer fitted with a cooling fan (newer, faster electronics require considerably more air flow to keep the electronics cool). Your laptop or other small electronic devices probably run on pure DC. You do not need AC in the electronics.

Tom-

You raise a good point about getting away from AC- the primary advantage of AC arises when one is sending the energy a long distance.

However, equipment designed to run directly from DC, such as lighting, refrigeration units (Air conditioners, refrigerators), etc., is considerably more expensive than more conventional equipment. One can find such equipment in the marine environment, or designed for mobile campers, etc. An example from a recent encounter with a reasonably sized DC chest freezer (specifically designed for use with a solar power system)- $4,000. An equivalent chest freezer for use with AC electricity would cost under $1,000. It is actually cheaper to invert the DC than it is to use DC directly. It doesn't seem logical, but that's what I have found.

I also have found that most people that are accustomed to AC lighting are not satisfied with the light level available from conventional DC lighting- resulting in the need to provide considerably more fixtures/bulbs to come up with something acceptable.

When one considers that 30-60% of the typical energy consumption for a modern home is used for air conditioning (heating or cooling, depending on where you live) and refrigeration, these sorts of numbers add up.

With regards to computers- I leave my computers running on AC 24/7 typically, and find that I still do not have sufficient energy demand to drive my electrical bill above the minimal "connection" charge...

I was doing research for converting a well to solar & came across this

http://support.automationdirect.com/docs/hitachi_dcpower.pdf

in this case the inverter is really a Freq drive

which has some promise

I have had great success with direct drive of well pumps with solar- more expensive than conventional AC systems, but functional. A major part of the expense is providing sufficient storage above the point of consumption to provide for gravity feed when the sun isn't shining. It only makes sense when grid power is not available.

I have also installed a solar-powered pool pump system for a client- works quite well, and the fact that the pump only runs when the sun is shining is not a critical limitation. Again, more than double the cost of a conventional pool water circulation system, but the customer has enough excess cash laying around, he isn't as concerned about efficacy as he is about the appearance of being "Green"...

the question is whether or not to replace the pump...

Currently we are looking at a windmill & really go direct drive

Anyway Frequency drives convert to DC & then generate a sign wave of what ever frequency to need to change the speed of ac motors

I'm not sure why we don't see freq drives used in this way

far cheaper & more reliable than dedicated solar stuff

http://www.automationdirect.com/adc/Shopping/Catalog/Drives/GS2_(115_-z-_230_-z-_460_-z-_575_VAC_V-z-Hz_Control)/GS2_Drive_Units_(115_-z-_230_-z-_460_-z-_575_VAC)

you would need to do some trickery so the input voltage wouldn't fluctuate enough to cause a fault

A major advantage of the DC pumps I have installed is that they can handle significant variation in voltage (and resulting significant variation in volume delivery). Where I have used them, this has not been a limiting factor. One would not want to rely on pump pressure to deliver the water to the point of consumption, however. Usually, we pump up to a tower-mounted tank (or for irrigation or keeping a stock tank full for watering pigs, cows or horses, one could get away with intermittent water delivery). This turns out to be a major cost item...

I have looked at wind--driven pumps as well- that used to be quite common throughout the US. My limited knowledge of such systems is that one requires significantly more mechanical linkage, which means a lot more maintenance and potential failure points. Direct solar, where applicable, has turned out to be cheaper and easier to implement than wind-driven systems. A viable alternative might be to use wind to generate DC to drive the pump. It's still cheaper, if you have reliable access to the grid, to use AC.

the wind mill is bone simple change the oil in the transmission every few years

the pump rod is uv stabilized fiberglass, there just isn't much to go wrong. The life of the components is measured in decades not years....

I haven't seen any wind generators that a competitive in price to solar panels

can you suggest any that you feel are of decent quality?

there are 2 - 2500gallon tanks going in about 70-80 feet above the house

so gravity should be fine

the whole project is window dressing, not about economic viability

I'm going over an existing solar hot water rig, to reduce the propane consumption to just the stove

were I doing an off the grid project from scratch I would take a much closer look a freq drive & 3 phase motors, led lighting....

Start here. For me, remote installations have always resulted in solar winning hands down...But that may have something to do with where I live.

I meant for electricity from wind

I like the way he thinks, thanks for the link!

Me too; that guy was great (and apparently popular, too).

The PVC vanes were especially neat--simply use more angular wrap to create the variable pitch from tip to hub. That reminds me of a company where I once worked that built centrifugal pumps out of pipe sectors and plate. The volute was rectangular in cross-section, with a flat bar circumference wrapped around Archimedean spiral end plates.

I think I would use a taper lock pulley for a hub

the whole thing is dependent on being able to find permanent magnet motors for a decent price

good cut in on getting the balance right....

Solar modules are more expensive in gullible America. I currently (no pun) have six that produce more power and less expensive than the twenty modules I bought 20 years ago. 6 x 235 watts vs 20 x 60 watts. The old ones still work quite well. Guess I am double gullible.

What kind of smoke are you blowing?

Solar PV panels are cheaper in the US than anywhere else in the world as far as I know - with the possible exception of China. They are also far cheaper than ever before.

So, where are you located, and, if different, where are solar panels cheaper than in US (which I presume is what you mean when you say America)? (I presume China is one place.)

Where are those cheaper panels manufactured, and, can they be imported into the US still at a lower cost than what we find here?

I am talking about the US - individual panels (plus shipping) Born, grew up and lived there - If you read correctly I said panels were cheap in the US

Try Sunelec for one source - there are many

Prices I see for individual panels - pallet lots are a bit cheaper

Evergreen for 1,59$ per watt DC -

Canadian Solar 1,74$ per watt DC

I read correctly and have an idea of what I am talking about on this topic.

If you wish to address a post to mog then type @mog

To determine to whom a reply is directed, pay attention to the "in reply to" in the upper right corner of a post.

I am so glad someone ....knows what they are talking about on this topic...because I got this message as a HomeOwner on the Evergreen site...Evergreen Solar panels are no longer widely available in the Americas. Please contact: Sun Electronics 511 NE 15th Street Miami FL 33132 T: +1.888.536.9917 www.sunel

The government has not yet figured out how to put a meter on the sun (charge you or tax you for solar energy). Thus, the development of solar energy (i.e. lower costs for solar panels) suffers the fate of the short term politician.

Well, I have taken solar panels services at my house and must say that in the starting you are going to think it's too expensive but you got to think about future expenses because in the near future inflation rate going to up as always. I am using solar panels for my heating, cooking, drying, etc. work.

solar panels maryland