Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by ChuckMcM 4637 days ago
Hmmm, that seems broken. I installed 5.2KW of panels on the roof of my Bay Area home in 2002, at the time panels were a lot more expensive but the subsidies were better too, I ended up paying just about $20,000 for the complete system (after rebates and with all parts, labor etc). The system is grid tied (meaning it feeds back into the grid) and we switched our billing to a watt for watt basis (not time of use as my kids were being home schooled and we were in the house 24/7). My electricity bill is now annual (the net power usage is computed from the Anniversary date, and any power I've used in excess of my generation is charged at a flat fee). My typical annual power cost is < $200 and occasionally less than $100. There is zero maintenance other than rinsing the panels off twice a year, and trimming the trees to avoid shade.

By calculating my what my electricity bill would have been vs what it was, they have saved me more than their cost (at some point I should go back again and get exact numbers).

Its entirely unclear how much "additional" value they give the resale value of my house. It is clearly some, but I don't have a good way of knowing if it is $20,000 or more.

At the time we financed the purchase as part of a refinancing of the house, so we did know the interest cost for the money, we also went through the great Recession so in traditional financial analysis (the 'do nothing' option) we would have predicted our money would have had a better return than it actually did, although that didn't really change the math all that much.

So I can't see how you don't get it paid off in < 10 years these days. At this point I'm thinking of adding another string to offset the addition of an electric car.

1 comments

http://www.gosolarcalifornia.org/tools/clean_power_estimator...

Using this calculator, pick a zip code in the Peninsula, I put in a 4000 watt system, estimate my bill to be $200/month, assume 2.5% increase in electricity prices per year, and assume I pay in cash. This gives me a 15 year payback period. At $100/month, it's a 24 year payback period.

Not that anyone would do it this way, but that calculator got me thinking. Often I have heard home affordability expressed as dollars per month vs dollars financed. So for example this worked example of a $200,000 mortgage [1] has a $1553.45 monthly payment, so for each $1 per month you got $124.24 of house. Does that make sense?

If so, now consider that your $200/month electricity bill is the equivalent of $124.24 x $200 or $24,847 worth of "house".

Our actual bills were $250 - $300/month pre-panels and effectively about $15/month post panels. In terms of money returned by 7 years we had paid less in electricity than we had paid for the panels. But that discounts what $20,000 would have been worth if we had invested it (that is the 'do nothing' alternative since you aren't really considering putting that money under a mattress :-) And of course we also made our house more efficient which we would have gotten that pay back either way.

The only downside to our system has been trying to explain to people why it doesn't provide power when the power is off.

[1] http://hfa3741.hubpages.com/hub/How-Much-Does-a-200-000-Hous...

I don't have a PV system, but I know people who do, so take this with a grain of salt: The default assumptions in that calculator are probably a little wrong.

First I think most people are paying closer to $5 per Watt, and I know someone who just refinanced his house in Long Beach at 3.5%, fixed. For comparison, the calculator assumes $10 per watt, and 8%. If you use halve the installed cost, there is obviously a big effect on the payback period (down to 6.5 years with tax incentives).