Solar to start new year with some long shadows

Another unproven "green" technology that the left embraces and isn't worth the money. Beside being an eyesore on any home it takes years to get your money back because it can only convert 10% of the sun's energy into heat. Reminds me of the birt killing wind farms and the slavery of children to mine lithium. The left just loves losers - like joe xiden.

While a student at Cal Poly in California in 1975, I checked out the engineering department on a break. The techs were fabricating solar cars. I asked about the energy output to propel such vehicles and was told 10% efficiency. Here it is, forty-seven years later, still 10%. Not much progress in solar technology, and yet the greenies still push this and wind power as the primo energy sources of the future.

The best solar panels convert at 20% efficiency right out of the box - this starts to drop from day one as the panels pick up dust, dirt, bird crap, etc. and the photovoltaic loses efficacy over time. You can only put the panels on the side of the roof that faces the sun, and any shadow from trees or any other obstruction during the day further reduces net power production. The panels produce very little at all except during hours of peak sun. Battery technology is not energy dense enough to store the quantities of energy required to power a home during non-peak hours, even if the solar panels could produce it. A standard 60-cell solar panel takes up about 18 sq. ft. of roof space, and at its best produces about 250w. All the factors above reduce this. If battery technology did exist that could store enough power, you could recharge the batteries off peak, and then power the house during the highest cost times. This is currently not possible. An electric car uses far less power than an entire house does, and even that takes 8-10 hours to recharge depending upon the battery capacity. Solar is a pipe dream - at least until the photocells can produce more with less space consumed, and there is some way to store the power until it is needed on demand.

People have been shocked to discover that with a roof covered in solar panels, when the power grid is shut down by the California power company......they have NO POWER. Those solar panels are NOT able to be used in their home. Useless without local controller and batteries to store power, which they do NOT have. And the whole house of cards is based on government subsidies. There is NO economic case for these panels. Subsidize installation. Subsidize the new wiring. Subsidize everything. AND require the power company by law to buy all the power that these panels produce, at very high prices, regardless of whether the grid needs it or they want it, or can afford it. This is never anything that could make it in a free market. Not a chance.

Solar and windmills are a novelty at best you build a cabin off the grid on a mountain 700 to 900 square feet and it will sustain. Like electric automobiles are golf carts that should remain on the course not cement highways in rush hour. Green energy is a fool's errand that's it soaking up billions upon billions of dollars yearly. MAGA

Solar is useful for small applications (my fish feeder use a small solar panel to keep its battery charged). Things like security lights, etc. It's not practical for a home. Maybe when better batteries or storage are improved, but not now, and it may be years from now before that comes about.

BINGO for #5. I have a cabin in that size range in the mountains, was far off the grid when built in the 90s. Heat with wood, hot water, cooking and refrigerator on propane. Sat TV and lighting and water pumping from a cistern on solar power. I designed and installed the system in the 90s when there was very little of the hardware available. It charges batteries, will run the lights and a few minimal things for a couple of cloudy days. But NO big electricity users. No microwave, no hair dryer, nothing that heats up with electricity, that draws WAY too much power. Lights, recharge a phone (no cell service) and run sat TV an hour or two a day for weather and maybe a movie. Solar for a normal suburban home would cost a HUGE amount for enough panels and enough batteries unless you offload everything possible onto fossil fuels like propane, oil or wood. Not financially practical anywhere that mains power is available. Doesn't work on cloudy days or at night, of course. High altitude southern Colorado has very high sunshine levels - still marginal.

Looked into Solar. One would have to be insane to believe the upfront investment will ever be paid for in utilities saved! And then everything must be replaced every 5 to 10 years! Joke!

For all the reasons posted previously is why I have not solarized my home. I get these guys knocking on my door wanting to persuade me to go solar. They don’t even get to finish the first sentence before I politely cut them short.

I have a 10KW grid tied system that nets positive into the grid for the year. A big house on a well with A/C and lots of landscaping to water. I designed the system and had it built to my spec. I went with a diesel generator instead of batteries for backup because it is far less expensive and a lot more reliable. This all is paid for after five years of savings on electric bills that were 300 to 500 dollars per month. I'm happy with my choice and POed that the power company is trying to get out of their agreement. POed but not surprised.

Ah, winter has arrived and the sun is hovering over the Tropic of Capricorn. The leaves have departed from their hosts and I am seeing solar panels on the southern and western roofs which were shaded all summer. Solar panels on the north and east sides too. We have some damned good salesmen around here

The "everything must be replaced in 8 to 10 years" comment is incorrect. My batteries are deep cycle lead acid, basically forklift batteries. They last about 12 years or so, which sorta fits the comment. The USED solar cells that I bought in 1990 (because new was way too expensive then) still put out pretty much the same power that they did then, possibly 5% less, but if so, I can't tell it for certain, they seem to put out the same number of peak amps as they did when I first installed them. I have added some newer solar panels because the price has dropped a lot, and after 25 years the charge controller failed and the the newer designs of charge controllers are better and have more useful info. IME, the quality monocrystalline silicon solar panels last at least 30= years, likely much longer, without significant degradation. I have no experience with polycrystalline solar cells, or the various 'coated surface' solar cells, they may have shorter lifespans, no idea.