Net Zero fanaticism is dragging us back to the Dark Ages

[Paradoxical]

It is not that the electricity is cheaper directly, but the electricity keeps coming year after year!
Solar is not the first thing a homeowner should spend money on, but once you have picked the other low hanging fruit, it is a next step.
Say a turn key 5000 watt system cost of $13,000 after tax credits, but generates 600 kWh per month. That is a savings of about $72 a month, for decades, assuming the cost of electricity increases, you save even more.
I am not sure of how many places a $13,000 investment would generate $72 a month but I think there are not too many.

The average family uses 10,715 watts a year and costs vary but average $3.00 a watt, meaning to cover that full amount it would be $30,000. plus. My question was before rebates as rebates make it "fake news" that solar is cheaper.

In Arizona, the cost for each KWH is .12 cents and that is on the lower average as Kalifornia charges 30% more than that (one of the reasons we moved). So, Arizona per year would be $1,300.00 and Kalifornia would be 30% more or roughly $1,700.00. (I incurred far more (double that) because we had a pool and a large house but that is irrelevant because the system cost is based on what you would use.

Using Arizona IF the system lasted 20 years (doubtable) the cost for solar for 10,000 watts is $30,000.00 and if I did nothing at all for those 20 years my electricity costs would be $26,000.00.

Solar panels degrade over time and produce less electricity. The solar batteries have to be replaced every 7-10 years and that will set someone back from $5,000 to $15,000.00, which could mean TWO battery replacements during that 20 years, and then you have the inverter at another couple grand plus maybe some broken glass. There would be NO rebates on those costs.

In my mind, the costs do not pencil out and we have been at solar now for 20 years or more and the prices are still more than what you'd pay if you did nothing in the RED state I live in. As for the blue states, are there any people still left in those?

 

[longview]

The average family uses 10,715 watts a year and costs vary but average $3.00 a watt, meaning to cover that full amount it would be $30,000. plus. My question was before rebates as rebates make it "fake news" that solar is cheaper.

In Arizona, the cost for each KWH is .12 cents and that is on the lower average as Kalifornia charges 30% more than that (one of the reasons we moved). So, Arizona per year would be $1,300.00 and Kalifornia would be 30% more or roughly $1,700.00. (I incurred far more (double that) because we had a pool and a large house but that is irrelevant because the system cost is based on what you would use.

Using Arizona IF the system lasted 20 years (doubtable) the cost for solar for 10,000 watts is $30,000.00 and if I did nothing at all for those 20 years my electricity costs would be $26,000.00.

Solar panels degrade over time and produce less electricity. The solar batteries have to be replaced every 7-10 years and that will set someone back from $5,000 to $15,000.00, which could mean TWO battery replacements during that 20 years, and then you have the inverter at another couple grand plus maybe some broken glass. There would be NO rebates on those costs.

In my mind, the costs do not pencil out and we have been at solar now for 20 years or more and the prices are still more than what you'd pay if you did nothing in the RED state I live in. As for the blue states, are there any people still left in those?

I think you are mistaking watts for watt-hours. a 10,000 watts system could produce 7,500 kWh per year, on average.
in Arizona it is MUCH better.Residential solar panels cost and savings in Arizona in 2023

How much does a solar system cost in Arizona?​

The cost of an installed residential solar system in Arizona is about $2.64 per watt before incentives. After claiming the 30% federal solar tax credit, the price is only $1.85 per watt.

They place the output of a 10,000 watt system at 17,520 kWh per year, which at $0.12 per kWh is $2,102 per year savings.
Such a system would generate a surplus in all but the monsoon months.
AZ still gives some net metering credits, but I would not expect those to last.
Assuming their install costs are correct a 10,000 watts system would have a net cost of $18,500 (after federal tax credit),
so if you saved $2,103 per year on a $18,500 investment, it would look like a 11.3% interest rate,
I don't know about you, but I am excited to find a 4% interest rate.
The savings are also tied to the price of electricity, if the price increases (and it will) the savings also increase.
For most people grid assist is the simplest system and will offer the best saving to investment.
To squeeze everything out of a system would require energy storage which could nearly double the cost of the system.

 

[PoS]

Don't count on it.

Yup, some people are just hopeless.

Did, Didn't help. Do I need to join a secrete organization to get the code?

No you dont need to secrete anything. Perhaps remedial English classes at your local adult school might help.

 

[craig]

Yup, some people are just hopeless.


No you dont need to secrete anything. Perhaps remedial English classes at your local adult school might help.

 

[StillBallin75]

If you go back in time. the weather was hotter and the animals never gave it a care. Matter of fact, plants and animals flourished.

Jesus ****ing Christ this is your response? And where the **** are those animals now?

 

[craig]

Don't count on it.

 

[Paradoxical]

I think you are mistaking watts for watt-hours. a 10,000 watts system could produce 7,500 kWh per year, on average.
in Arizona it is MUCH better.Residential solar panels cost and savings in Arizona in 2023

They place the output of a 10,000 watt system at 17,520 kWh per year, which at $0.12 per kWh is $2,102 per year savings.
Such a system would generate a surplus in all but the monsoon months.
AZ still gives some net metering credits, but I would not expect those to last.
Assuming their install costs are correct a 10,000 watts system would have a net cost of $18,500 (after federal tax credit),
so if you saved $2,103 per year on a $18,500 investment, it would look like a 11.3% interest rate,
I don't know about you, but I am excited to find a 4% interest rate.
The savings are also tied to the price of electricity, if the price increases (and it will) the savings also increase.
For most people grid assist is the simplest system and will offer the best saving to investment.
To squeeze everything out of a system would require energy storage which could nearly double the cost of the system.

My postings are about what a system costs without tax credits, which I think is the only method that should be used. One also has to consider the life expectancy of the system itself. The biggest high-ticket item is the batteries and they wear out in 10 years. I would also be concerned in Arizona about hail damage to the roof panels.

With all these subsidies and the time we have had solar, I would think the cost would be a fraction of what they are and that some sharp scientists would have invented better and cheaper panels and batteries. Instead, we still have toxic batteries that are made by excavating tons of earth with big machines. We are helping China when we go solar as well because they use cheap labor that America can't compete with.

I checked your link and was surprised that the 30% credit is not a reduction in the cost of the system but a credit to your federal taxes. The way I read it, someone would have to be in a fairly high tax bracket to need a write-off of several thousand dollars because unless you would otherwise owe that amount of money in federal taxes, the credit is not worth it to those with average incomes.

If you pay federal income taxes, 30% of your solar system costs can be claimed as a deduction from your federal tax liability.

Unfortunately, the Arizona state tax credit expired on Jan 1, 2021. Prior to that, you could claim 25% of the cost of your solar system to be claimed as a deduction from your state taxes of up to $1,000.

 

[longview]

My postings are about what a system costs without tax credits, which I think is the only method that should be used. One also has to consider the life expectancy of the system itself. The biggest high-ticket item is the batteries and they wear out in 10 years. I would also be concerned in Arizona about hail damage to the roof panels.

With all these subsidies and the time we have had solar, I would think the cost would be a fraction of what they are and that some sharp scientists would have invented better and cheaper panels and batteries. Instead, we still have toxic batteries that are made by excavating tons of earth with big machines. We are helping China when we go solar as well because they use cheap labor that America can't compete with.

I checked your link and was surprised that the 30% credit is not a reduction in the cost of the system but a credit to your federal taxes. The way I read it, someone would have to be in a fairly high tax bracket to need a write-off of several thousand dollars because unless you would otherwise owe that amount of money in federal taxes, the credit is not worth it to those with average incomes.

If you pay federal income taxes, 30% of your solar system costs can be claimed as a deduction from your federal tax liability.

Unfortunately, the Arizona state tax credit expired on Jan 1, 2021. Prior to that, you could claim 25% of the cost of your solar system to be claimed as a deduction from your state taxes of up to $1,000.

Most people would not leave money on the table, so the 30% federal tax credit has to be counted.
As for the batteries, grid tied systems do not require batteries.
I think the federal tax credit can be spread over several years , but am not sure, ( I Think one of the turbo tax questions,
was do you have any tax energy savings tax credits from earlier years?)
I suspect the average household pays at least $7000 a year in income taxes so that would equal 30% of a $23,000 system.
Also the 30% is a tax credit, not a tax deduction.

 

[Paradoxical]

Jesus ****ing Christ this is your response? And where the **** are those animals now?

They were worried about climate change and spent Earth almost into oblivion by making all Dinos eat grass and bugs because some Dinos had too much meat while others had none and they thought that wasn't equitable and all Dinos were entitled to whatever another Dino had. I asked Chat GPT this question and even though Chat GPT is a very liberal program and will never diss equity or green energy it responded to your query of ......"And where are those animals now?" by saying that even though their Great Reset of making everyone the same including boy Dinos and Girl Dinos and it "worked" because the Dinos got used to eating insects and getting along with everyone by allowing the Big male dinos to play in the little girl dino games and everything was all good because now every Dino was starving instead of just a few, a meteorite came along and really changed the climate.

 

[ASHES]

 

[Paradoxical]

Yup, some people are just hopeless.


No you dont need to secrete anything. Perhaps remedial English classes at your local adult school might help.

I sense that for many left-wingers here, English is their second language, and their struggles with grasping logic and common sense is not only because they are stupid.

 

[craig]

I sense that for many left-wingers here, English is their second language, and their struggles with grasping logic and common sense is not only because they are stupid.

What sense did you use to create this tortured sentence?

 

[Paradoxical]

What sense did you use to create this tortured sentence?

That you don't understand what I wrote.