Estimated cost to put a 4k system on my roof including the 30% tax credit is $8500. At my current average SCE bill of $50 that means a raw break even point of 14 years. Factor in the present value and opportunity cost it does not make economic sense for me even with high sunbelt insolation and high energy costs of $0.19/kwh.

There are lots of other good reasons to consider solar PV including energy independence, the ability to generate electricity even when the grid is down, or simply wanting to do your part to help phase out coal generation. From a pure desire to save money long term, you probably need to be in the sun belt with Edison rates above $0.10kwh and have an electric bill above $200/mo.

Same with me. It would be a money loser for me with my low energy costs. I spent my money on making the home more efficient with a payback of only a couple of years.

When I built our home, I tried to make it energy efficient as I could with R30 ceiling and floor, plus R19 in the six inch walls, etc., etc.. The fact that even the lowest level on our tiered rate system by the power company is up to $.29 per kWh up to a monthly usage of only 520 kWh/month (down from 620 kWh/month) made it a good move to make. If I remember correctly, that rate was $.19 per kWh not more than ten years ago, which made installing solar made sense. At the rate they're making increases, no telling what it will be even in the short term.

Not sure who you are with. PG&E wants you to bend over and go in dry.

https://calmatters.org/economy/2019/08/pges-rate-increases-what-you-need-to-know/


How much more will customers’ costs go up?
Based on what we know, the average residential PG&E customer could pay nearly $360 more a year in three years, or a 17% increase in their monthly bills. This is because the utility is asking permission from state and federal regulators — separately from the bankruptcy proceedings — to increase its revenue in five ways. Most, but not all, of the new revenue would be passed to consumers.

First, PG&E has asked for a three-year increase totaling $2 billion.That would include a 12.4% jump next year, a 4.7% increase the year after that and a 4.8% hike in 2022. That’s nearly a 22% rise. PG&E says much of the extra money is needed for fire-safety improvements such as more fire-resistant poles, covered power lines, new weather stations and high-definition field cameras.

In this scenario, for the average PG&E residential customer using both electricity and gas, the current bill of $172.94 a month would go up to $193.25 in three years.

I have SDG&E, and they probably have PG&E beat in terms of raising rates (note the rates I've stated before). In my area, they are installing steel poles along with much larger steel poles that seem to be the ones carrying larger distribution lines. We're all glad to see this even though they are ugly as hell (not that the regular poles are beautiful) and won't improve the availability of insurance, which I and most people around me have had not renewed and had to go onto the CA Fair Plan at a third and more increase in premiums for less coverage. Those PG&E rate increases sound bad, but I have the impression SDG&E had them beat a long time ago.

From the same article.

But PG&E isn’t alone. While Southern California Edison rates largely appear to keep track with inflation at 18%, San Diego Gas & Electric’s have jumped 51% in the past decade. That’s partly because SDG&E’s customers have been installing solar panels at a higher rate, which distorts the average cost because each customer appears to be consuming less electricity.

Interesting. I can tell you I called the solar telephone line for SDG&E once and the lady was none too friendly. It's probably the same in other sunny places but lots of large businesses, factories, school parking lots, and more are covered with solar panels all over the place.

Using that link and the defaults I can generate $348 worth of juice a year. :eek:

Or gain of opportunity...if you run those same numbers looking at the S&P in 2006 and the years following, I'm sure the numbers don't work out nearly as well. While I agree with your point, I've learned that trying to time or predict the stock market has a much MUCH less success rate than trying to predict what will happen to utility rates! Locking in a solid ROI that only seems to get better every year they raise rates vs. what could potentially happen with the S&P over the next 5-7 years was worth the risk to me.

There is risk involved. And the last couple of years the rate of return has been really good. It is still a parameter that must be taken into account. Is areas with very high electricity rates and high solar energy potential it can save money. In many other areas it is a money loser.

For me it is a money loser without even considering the potential lost investment gains.

In much of Cali you would be foolish to not go that route due to the excessively high costs. And those costs are only going to up with increased home solar production. The fixed costs of PG&E and others isn't going to go down. They will still have the same amount of transmission lines to monitor and repair. They will still have the number or powerplants to supply round the clock power. That fixed cost will just be spread out over fewer customers at an even greater future cost.

The upper middle class and above have the resources to add the solar panels. The lower middle class and below will take it in the shorts because they don't have 10 grand sitting around to use on an upgrade. . Same with fuel prices and EV sales and Cali dislike for the entire O&G sector.

He said he hasn't paid a utility bill since the installation of the system. If he hadn't installed the system and put $18,900 into the market he would have had to come up with a utility payment every month. Putting $18,900 into a stock portfolio and then taking between $595 and $225 back out every month would change the calculations significantly.

It is still part of the equation that shouldn't be overlooked. In my case I would have to spend 20 grand or more to save 150 a month.

Some areas are well worth the investment. In others it is a money loser. Just look at all parameters to determine cost effectiveness.

Not to mention the tax implications, dividend management, maintenance of panels...and then my head starts to hurt and I give up trying:)

No kidding, bio.

Exactly...it's a no brainer to do it in California, and a no brainer not to do it in Ohio (based on ~$.02/kwh)

It's the in betweens that really have to look at the equations closely.

what maintenance of panels??


BTW, I looked at this 3 times, and am told to wait until I need a new roof

Cleaning, but you can do that yourself. Over the 20 year lifespan you should expect some system component replacement/repair.

I thought in a thread a couple weeks ago we established that without a battery system, code is that the solar provides no energy when the grid is down, to prevent backfeed and electrocuting the poor guy trying to get the power back on.

I would be surprised if there is not an available auto disconnect.

the panels (herabouts) are guaranteed good for 20 years, and so is the output

cleaning might help a tad

I hope my downhill neighbor does not clean his - when new the glare was terrible - right to my deck

another issue is squirrels getting to the wires and chewing on them - so make sure the install uses a barrier like heavy hog wire, etc.