|
|
|
Author |
|
Message | |
|
Slim
Joined: 05 Mar 2006 Posts: 6612 Location: New England (In the US of A)
|
Posted: Mon Sep 05, 16 1:02 pm Post subject: Good, or not as good solar panels |
|
So..... finding an inexpensive arborist suddenly turned into considerations for putting solar panels on top of my garage. There are two popular installation companies in my area.
I won't get real proposals until my trees are actually out of the way, but here are the ballpark ideas (ignoring potential post-purchase income tax breaks):
Offer #1 is about 12 panels, installed, permitted, etc for ~$950 per panel, and then a $1k cash back incentive a couple months after final hookup to the grid.
Offer #2 I'm estimating to be more like $1,400 per panel, not sure if it would be the same number of panels.
Both companies' products can be purchased with similar financing (about 2.99%) and I could possibly get a less expensive loan from a family member (or pooled from several). There is currently incentive to have a deal inked before the end of the year as the net-metering rules are about to change here, and new agreements will only allow for summer surplus generation to pay for winter electric usage, and not for the entire bill (service fee, etc).
I know that company #2 uses better panels, that generate a bit more power. I'm also at a lower income than many making these considerations. A financed system from #1 would maybe be payments that are about $50 more than my average current power bill, while I'm estimating payments for system #2 to be maybe $100 more per month my average bill.
I haven't actually talked with company #2 yet, just know the numbers they gave to someone else. I'm assuming they would say we don't need as many panels (why generate more credits than you utilize in a year?). However, my building is a duplex, and the other half uses electric heat. Also, if I were generating my own electric there would be incentive to switch water heaters to electric in the future, and maybe invest in a heat pump for my unit, etc.... In other words, if I could generate some solar energy, I'd utilize it and reduce other bills (and therefore natural gas usage). It seems as though the world is quickly moving to electric cars as well, so I think additional generation capacity will be useful.
So, go with less power per panel but a quicker/easier payback, or more power per panel but more difficult payments?
Issue is further compounded by the fact that I may not live here for more than a couple more years, however I would likely keep the house and just continue it as a rental property. I feel like solar power is still a nice perk for future renters ("Low utility bills!") and I also feel a bit of moral obligation to keep reducing humanity's carbon releases.
Sorry for wall of text! Not looking for a complete solution, just peoples' thoughts and suggestions for how to consider the situation.
Thanks to any thought-givers! |
|
|
|
|
vegplot
Joined: 19 Apr 2007 Posts: 21301 Location: Bethesda, Gwynedd
|
|
|
|
|
dpack
Joined: 02 Jul 2005 Posts: 46207 Location: yes
|
|
|
|
|
Slim
Joined: 05 Mar 2006 Posts: 6612 Location: New England (In the US of A)
|
|
|
|
|
tahir
Joined: 28 Oct 2004 Posts: 45669 Location: Essex
|
|
|
|
|
|
Archive
Powered by php-BB © 2001, 2005 php-BB Group Style by marsjupiter.com, released under GNU (GNU/GPL) license.
|