[et2o]

I don’t fully understand the appeal from the manufacturers’ side for in-home batteries and solar. We don’t expect houses to have their own coal powerplants or nuclear generators; why is renewable energy different?

Single family housing is becoming a smaller segment of the market as time goes on; those who rent apartments or own condominiums have little say in how their electricity is delivered as well.

[speedylight]

I feel like you’re comparing Apple’s to Oranges, it’s much more reasonable to have a solar panel mounted on a house than most other power sources mainly because it’s passive, it doesn’t have any emissions as far as I know, it doesn’t make any noise, they’re not obtrusive other than being ugly to look at. Solar installed directly on a house also means you’re not using any extra land like you would a solar farm, and if you have solar panels installed then you will need a battery to store that power unless you’re feeding to a grid to store off site.

And I think one of the lesser discussed benefits of solar is it decentralizes the power grid so a hypothetical attack on infrastructure would be much harder to pull off.

Heck even a small wind turbine could probably be integrated into most homes with no major problems, but that’s just my opinion.

[Arrath]

Yeah, my roof is free real estate as far as solar power is concerned and I would absolutely consider installing panels on my roof, if I owned. I wouldn't consider putting in a micro-coal or micro-NG power plant, if such things existed.

[ldbooth]

People install solar panels when the levelized cost of electricity is cheaper than buying from the utility. This is about the cost of fueling the vehicle.

Energy presents a new market to sell goods and services into, they don't want 3rd parties to control the ecosystem after the vehicle sale. There's a battle for home energy ecosystem control playing out today. See Enphase's full product offering for an example.