# 500 kw Install in NC



## Zog (Apr 15, 2009)

Looks good, how much that cost them? Maybe I put one on my building


----------



## dronai (Apr 11, 2011)

How long to do the entire job ? Is there battery storage ? Are the AC line and the solar tied together like a residential installation ?


----------



## Charlie3502 (Dec 3, 2010)

Thanks. It cost the client 2.5 million. Took 25 days. No battery, it is a straight sell back.


----------



## Zog (Apr 15, 2009)

Charlie3502 said:


> Thanks. It cost the client 2.5 million. Took 25 days. No battery, it is a straight sell back.


Looks like $2.5M happens to be the cap on NC corperate rebates, so cost customer $1.6M and generates about $56k/year worth of power? That seem about right? Am I missing anything?


----------



## ampman (Apr 2, 2009)

solyendra just filed for bankruptcy after taking 500 mil from the tax payers and let go 1000 people 'don't count on doing another job like this


----------



## gold (Feb 15, 2008)

Can NC SRECs still trade in DC? 

Nice looking work BTW. 25 days is pretty good for a system that size.


----------



## piperunner (Aug 22, 2009)

Well nice job neat clean looking !!!!


----------



## gold (Feb 15, 2008)

Zog said:


> Am I missing anything?


The $125k - $175k it generates in SRECs.

2.5M system cost
1.75 M after federal tax incentives

50k per year in savings
150K Estimated SREC value (600 per year at 250 per)

ROI is between 8 and 10 years. (estimated)

Edit 
Correction 
With the amount of shading in that pic the ROI would probably be closer to 10-12 years


----------



## BustedKnuckle (Sep 1, 2011)

Where are the ballast stones to hold the array down? 

I've never seen panels laid flat like that.


----------



## Charlie3502 (Dec 3, 2010)

Sorry I was out of town for the past couple of days.
There are no ballast stones. These panels lay flat on legs and interlock with the panel(s) next to it. 
Yes there is some shading but we have 4 arrays all together and that one picture is of the smallest. Altogether there are 2350 panels.


----------



## captkirk (Nov 21, 2007)

Nice work.... looks like those two rigid risers are being held up by threaded rod....seems a little heavy to me....but what do I know...im just an old country electrician..


----------



## Clintmiljavac (Aug 18, 2011)

Nice install!! Craftsmanship looks great.


----------



## Wireman191 (Aug 28, 2011)

Looks like someone knows what they are doing! Nice work!


----------



## BBQ (Nov 16, 2010)

300.11 Securing and Supporting.
(B) Raceways Used as Means of Support. *Raceways
shall be used only as a means of support for other raceways,
cables, or nonelectrical equipment under any of the
following conditions:*

(1) Where the raceway or means of support is identified for
the purpose

(2) Where the raceway contains power supply conductors
for electrically controlled equipment and is used to support
Class 2 circuit conductors or cables that are solely
for the purpose of connection to the equipment control
circuits

(3) Where the raceway is used to support boxes or conduit
bodies in accordance with 314.23 or to support luminaires
in accordance with 410.36(E)























344.30 Securing and Supporting.
(A) Securely Fastened. RMC shall be securely fastened
*within 900 mm (3 ft) of each outlet box,* junction box,
device box, cabinet, conduit body, or other conduit termination.
*Fastening shall be permitted to be increased to a
distance of 1.5 m (5 ft) *where structural members do not
readily permit fastening within 900 mm (3 ft). Where approved,
conduit shall not be required to be securely fastened
within 900 mm (3 ft) of the service head for abovethe-
roof termination of a mast.


----------



## Jlarson (Jun 28, 2009)

I was just about to say I see a 300.11 violation then I saw BBQ beat me to it... damn code nerd. :laughing:


----------



## BBQ (Nov 16, 2010)

Charlie3502 said:


>



310.4 Conductors in Parallel.

(B) Conductor Characteristics. The paralleled conductors
in each phase, polarity, neutral, grounded circuit conductor,
or equipment grounding conductor shall comply
with all of the following:

(1) Be the same length


----------



## sinewave707 (Sep 5, 2011)

solar will save us from ourselves, and these dirty nukes!!! nice work.


----------



## cabletie (Feb 12, 2011)

Nice Job. I would not worry about supporting the EMT off of that ridged on such a clean install. Would something like that be a problem in another state? I am curious of the bonding bushings/locknuts. Did you use any?



ampman said:


> solyendra just filed for bankruptcy after taking 500 mil from the tax payers and let go 1000 people 'don't count on doing another job like this


 
I went to a class for solyendra (more like demonstration) and was thinking if I had money they would be a good company to invest in. I thought for sure they would take the market. No ballast, no snow to worry about, No grounding, high kwh per kw installed (thin film) good use of reflected light from below. They did have a different way of wiring the strings in a series parallel set up. I think they will be back. Did they file for protection or are they completely gone?


----------



## cabletie (Feb 12, 2011)

> I would not worry about supporting the EMT off of that ridged on such a clean install


I did not see all the unsuported 2" at first I get your point.


----------



## BBQ (Nov 16, 2010)

sinewave707 said:


> solar will save us from ourselves, and these dirty nukes!!! nice work.


I often like to use electricity at night.


----------



## Sordoni (Sep 5, 2011)

BBQ said:


> I often like to use electricity at night.


Batteries.


----------



## Charlie3502 (Dec 3, 2010)

You have me on the 4" rigid however, the .75" qualifies under 300.11 B(2). Also here is a picture of the support for the 2".


----------



## hardworkingstiff (Jan 22, 2007)

Nice work!

Just curious, what size/# of conductors in the 2" rigid and what's the rating of those LRs, LLs, and LBs?

Also, how much more would it have cost to use malleable conduit bodies?

Did I say nice work? Really nice.! :thumbup:


----------



## BBQ (Nov 16, 2010)

Sordoni said:


> Batteries.


Oh do you have some long lasting low cost ones you can share with the rest of us?

For what it is worth I have designed and installed PV jobs, I have gone to classes and seminars on it, I am not totally clueless about the subject


----------



## Sordoni (Sep 5, 2011)

BBQ said:


> Oh do you have some long lasting low cost ones you can share with the rest of us?


I'm a fan of Duracel.


----------



## Zog (Apr 15, 2009)

gold said:


> The $125k - $175k it generates in SRECs.
> 
> 2.5M system cost
> 1.75 M after federal tax incentives
> ...


I don't think NC has SRECs like NJ. At least I have not found info on the NC program.


----------



## BBQ (Nov 16, 2010)

Sordoni said:


> I'm a fan of Duracel.


:laughing:

Cool:jester:


----------



## HARRY304E (Sep 15, 2010)

BBQ said:


> I often like to use electricity at night.


:laughing::laughing:


----------



## don_resqcapt19 (Jul 18, 2010)

Charlie3502 said:


> You have me on the 4" rigid however, the .75" qualifies under 300.11 B(2). ...


The rule you cited does not permit you to support the 3/4" conduit from the other conduits.


----------



## CFL (Jan 28, 2009)

Charlie3502 said:


> You have me on the 4" rigid however, the .75" qualifies under 300.11 B(2). Also here is a picture of the support for the 2".


300.11 B(2) is an exception for class2 conductors or cables, not raceways on other raceways. At least that is how it reads. I see it as to allow a cable to be ty-wrapped to a raceway that is heading to same machine, for example.


----------



## don_resqcapt19 (Jul 18, 2010)

Zog said:


> I don't think NC has SRECs like NJ. At least I have not found info on the NC program.


So the real world payback without the artificial support of the federal taxpayers and the utility customers is 50 years.


----------



## BBQ (Nov 16, 2010)

don_resqcapt19 said:


> So the real world payback without the artificial support of the federal taxpayers and the utility customers is 50 years.


Very likely or just 5 to 7 years if you stubbornly refuse to admit that support has anything to do with it.:laughing:


----------



## McClary’s Electrical (Feb 21, 2009)

hardworkingstiff said:


> > what's the rating of those LRs, LLs, and LBs?
> >
> >
> > > What do you mean by this? Cu I's?
> > ...


----------



## BBQ (Nov 16, 2010)

mcclary's electrical said:


> hardworkingstiff said:
> 
> 
> > what's the rating of those LRs, LLs, and LBs?
> ...


Standard LBs are not listed to hold all the conductors that fit in the raceway.

For instance you can fill a 2" EMT with 4/0s but you can't put them all in a standard 2" EMT LB.


----------



## hardworkingstiff (Jan 22, 2007)

mcclary's electrical said:


> Why? do somebody need to weld on them?


:laughing:

It just seems odd that someone will go to the expense of installing GRS conduit (instead of a lightweight EMT) and then use those lightweight AL conduit bodies, that's all.


----------



## don_resqcapt19 (Jul 18, 2010)

BBQ said:


> Very likely or just 5 to 7 years if you stubbornly refuse to admit that support has anything to do with it.:laughing:


I don't understand...$2,500,000 cost and a return of $50,000 per year. 

I am not saying that the support does not change the payback for the owner, just that the installation of solar does not make any economic sense. It doesn't matter where the money comes from, if the cost is 2.5 million and the ROI is 50k per year, the system will not pay for itself in its expected life.


----------



## eutecticalloy (Dec 12, 2010)

BBQ said:


> Oh do you have some long lasting low cost ones you can share with the rest of us?
> 
> For what it is worth I have designed and installed PV jobs, I have gone to classes and seminars on it, I am not totally clueless about the subject


I am totally getting out of solar.... It seems like every two weeks I have a day off due to no work.


----------



## McClary’s Electrical (Feb 21, 2009)

hardworkingstiff said:


> :laughing:
> 
> It just seems odd that someone will go to the expense of installing GRS conduit (instead of a lightweight EMT) and then use those lightweight AL conduit bodies, that's all.


 

I gotcha:thumbsup: I agree


----------



## ampman (Apr 2, 2009)

cabletie said:


> Nice Job. I would not worry about supporting the EMT off of that ridged on such a clean install. Would something like that be a problem in another state? I am curious of the bonding bushings/locknuts. Did you use any?
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 i think they are done after letting go 1000 employees not sure how many they had


----------



## eutecticalloy (Dec 12, 2010)

ampman said:


> i think they are done after letting go 1000 employees not sure how many they had


I drive by the plants everyday in fremont, california. I even did a job for one of their engineers. He said they cornered the solar market with their low light solar panels. They were suppose to employ many people here but I guess not.


----------



## gold (Feb 15, 2008)

Zog said:


> I don't think NC has SRECs like NJ. At least I have not found info on the NC program.


They do Generate SRECs but the state doesn't have an RPA in place for anyone (like FLETT) to build a trading platform around so they are typically sold on the DC exchange which is currently about $250. They are expected to have an RPA in place by the beginning of next year and the value is expected to jump up over 500 as it did in Mass over the summer.


----------



## gold (Feb 15, 2008)

don_resqcapt19 said:


> So the real world payback without the artificial support of the federal taxpayers and the utility customers is 50 years.


No the real world payback is probably somewhere between 8-12 years. The artificial support of the federal taxpayers is returned through an expanded job market, tax base and increased energy independance. Pretty much the same as the artificial support of the tax payers that goes to wind, nuclear, co-generation, hydro and so on.



don_resqcapt19 said:


> I don't understand...$2,500,000 cost and a return of $50,000 per year.
> 
> I am not saying that the support does not change the payback for the owner, just that the installation of solar does not make any economic sense. It doesn't matter where the money comes from, if the cost is 2.5 million and the ROI is 50k per year, the system will not pay for itself in its expected life.


It makes as much economic sense as every other power generation that has ever received tax incentives or subsidies. Perhaps more when you account for environmental impact.


----------



## Zog (Apr 15, 2009)

gold said:


> They do Generate SRECs but the state doesn't have an RPA in place for anyone (like FLETT) to build a trading platform around so they are typically sold on the DC exchange which is currently about $250.


They don't generate SRECs, someone has to issue them and someone has to force utilities to buy them, so please provide a link to the NC program. 


gold said:


> They are expected to have an RPA in place by the beginning of next year and the value is expected to jump up over 500 as it did in Mass over the summer.


 I see nothing to suggest the values are headed anywhere but down.


----------



## Zog (Apr 15, 2009)

ampman said:


> i think they are done after letting go 1000 employees not sure how many they had


They closed the plant, cut off all 1,100 employees without the required 90 warning period. No pay, benifits, nothing. So much for the $535M loan the government gave them.
http://www.bizjournals.com/sanjose/news/2011/09/05/stark-calls-on-solyndra-to-pay-workers.html


----------



## gold (Feb 15, 2008)

Zog said:


> They don't generate SRECs, someone has to issue them and someone has to force utilities to buy them, so please provide a link to the NC program.
> I see nothing to suggest the values are headed anywhere but down.


Google flett exchange and do your own research. UTILITIES ARE NOT FORCED TO BUY SRECs, they have other options buying the SRECs are the most financially viable. Buying the SREC is cheaper then buying the actual green power (at the indexed rates there required to pay for ALL ENERGY REGARDLESS OF HOW IT IS PRODUCED) required to meet the clean energy standards set forth by the RPA.

The only thing that drives SREC prices down are exceeding the RPA requirements. NC currently has no RPA. Hence no demand, once the RPA is passed the demand will exceed the supply for the first few years. Look at Mass for example once they enacted there RPA the SREC prices shot up to 500 each (just this summer) and they began listing them on FLET.


----------



## Zog (Apr 15, 2009)

gold said:


> Google flett exchange and do your own research.


 I know what the flett exchange is, but how does that effect NC? 



gold said:


> UTILITIES ARE NOT FORCED TO BUY SRECs, they have other options buying the SRECs are the most financially viable. Buying the SREC is cheaper then buying the actual green power (at the indexed rates there required to pay for ALL ENERGY REGARDLESS OF HOW IT IS PRODUCED) required to meet the clean energy standards set forth by the RPA.


 Right, forced was a bad term for me to use, they have more expensive choices. :blink:



gold said:


> The only thing that drives SREC prices down are exceeding the RPA requirements. NC currently has no RPA. Hence no demand, once the RPA is passed the demand will exceed the supply for the first few years. Look at Mass for example once they enacted there RPA the SREC prices shot up to 500 each (just this summer) and they began listing them on FLET.


 I have to say, you are an optimist.


----------



## don_resqcapt19 (Jul 18, 2010)

gold said:


> No the real world payback is probably somewhere between 8-12 years. The artificial support of the federal taxpayers is returned through an expanded job market, tax base and increased energy independance. Pretty much the same as the artificial support of the tax payers that goes to wind, nuclear, co-generation, hydro and so on.


And the government has not business providing that artificial support either.[/quote]


> It makes as much economic sense as every other power generation that has ever received tax incentives or subsidies. ...


See above.


----------



## gold (Feb 15, 2008)

Zog said:


> If you actually read my posts you would know I am actually considering putting a large PV system on one or more of my buildings and am trying to figure out the economics of the system. I am not going to invest in a system because godl said it would pay back in 8 years, I need real numbers, and as far as I have seen in NC it would be about 28 years after federal rebate.


I Have allready explained why and how the return is considerably shorter. It is your prerogative to not believe it but please stop disrupting the alternative energy threads.


Zog said:


> I know what the flett exchange is, but how does that effect NC?


You questions are so vague and leading they remind me of a homeowner asking me to teach them how to electric. 

Once the NC has an RPA a demand will be made to meet clean energy requirements. Those
Those requirements will be met by buying said clean energy at an indexed rate or buying srecs. There will then be a need for an exchange platform hence flet
Currently wit no RPA in NC residents must sell there srec under the DC exchange.





BBQ said:


> You really meet all my expectations of a typical NJ guy.


please refrain from the personal attacks and I will.




don_resqcapt19 said:


> And the government has not business providing that artificial support either.




And thank you for your political perspective. Please keep the rest of your political opinions out of this thread.


----------



## BBQ (Nov 16, 2010)

gold said:


> I Have allready explained why and how the return is considerably shorter. It is your prerogative to not believe it but please stop disrupting the alternative energy threads.
> 
> please refrain from the personal attacks and I will.
> 
> ...


:laughing::laughing:

You are funny,


----------



## Zog (Apr 15, 2009)

gold said:


> I Have allready explained why and how the return is considerably shorter.


 No you have not, you are just throwing numbers out there with out anything to back them up. 



gold said:


> please refrain from the personal attacks and I will.


 Please refrian from quoting someone else and making it look like it was something I said, that comment was not from me. 



gold said:


> You questions are so vague and leading they remind me of a homeowner asking me to teach them how to electric.


 Your answers are what is vauge, maybe you can teach me "how to electric"



gold said:


> Once the NC has an RPA a demand will be made to meet clean energy requirements. Those requirements will be met by buying said clean energy at an indexed rate or buying srecs. There will then be a need for an exchange platform hence flet
> Currently wit no RPA in NC residents must sell there srec under the DC exchange.


 So you are basing your entire arguement on something that does not exist yet and you assume will exist in the future?


----------



## don_resqcapt19 (Jul 18, 2010)

gold said:


> ...
> And thank you for your political perspective. Please keep the rest of your political opinions out of this thread.


You brought up the other subsidies as a way of saying that I should always consider them in my assessment of the payback period. Those subsidies are still part of the cost of the project, no matter what type of generation is being subsidized, and need to be included in the total cost for the purpose of a real economic payback.


----------



## gold (Feb 15, 2008)

Zog said:


> No you have not, you are just throwing numbers out there with out anything to back them up.
> I didn't install this system the OP did. I posted what was typical of a ROI for this system based on my experience and what I know about the NC solar market.
> Please refrian from quoting someone else and making it look like it was something I said, that comment was not from me.
> That was not intentional I was trying to multiquote from my cell phone and deleted a chunk.
> ...


Basically yes. However I was wrong and there is in fact already an RPA in place in NC. It seems tho there is some conflict with the NC RET (tracking system) that is preventing Flet and other exchanges from listing them and there primarily traded through aggregation. Tho smaller quantities can still be sold in the DC market and Missouri (as NAPS). I didn't realized they were this far ahead.



don_resqcapt19 said:


> You brought up the other subsidies as a way of saying that I should always consider them in my assessment of the payback period. Those subsidies are still part of the cost of the project, no matter what type of generation is being subsidized, and need to be included in the total cost for the purpose of a real economic payback.


Yea, my point exactly the SRECS (NC RETS/NAR/WREGIS/ERCOT or which ever your trading) Should very well be considered when assessing your ROI. That should be the case weather you build a grid active micro pv system or a 100 megawat hydro plant.


----------



## McClary’s Electrical (Feb 21, 2009)

Here's my take on the ENTIRE last page of this thread. When a potential customer ask me what the ROI is. I say look, I'm not preaching a ROI, in fact, IMO, we shouldn't even worry about ROI. You should do it because it's the right thing to do for the environment.


----------



## ampman (Apr 2, 2009)

eutecticalloy said:


> I drive by the plants everyday in fremont, california. I even did a job for one of their engineers. He said they cornered the solar market with their low light solar panels. They were suppose to employ many people here but I guess not.


 it really sucks to see


----------



## ampman (Apr 2, 2009)

Zog said:


> They closed the plant, cut off all 1,100 employees without the required 90 warning period. No pay, benifits, nothing. So much for the $535M loan the government gave them.
> http://www.bizjournals.com/sanjose/news/2011/09/05/stark-calls-on-solyndra-to-pay-workers.html


 the govt. has no business being in private business


----------



## don_resqcapt19 (Jul 18, 2010)

gold said:


> ...
> Yea, my point exactly the SRECS (NC RETS/NAR/WREGIS/ERCOT or which ever your trading) Should very well be considered when assessing your ROI. That should be the case weather you build a grid active micro pv system or a 100 megawat hydro plant.


And I just don't agree...that money is coming out of someones pocket. Sure I understand that when you are selling and installing them you have to use that money to get anyone to even think about installing the system, but it is still not a real world number. The systems do not have a positive ROI on their own without the support of other peoples money. 
The other issue with this whole thing is just like a lot of other things in the electrical world. Most of the information comes from people that have a vested economic interest in the product. It is not just alternative energy sources but lots of things. I tend to believe almost no information that comes from any one who has a vested economic interest in the product, no matter what the product is.


----------



## Justin L. (Sep 6, 2011)

I don't know as much as you guys do about solar, but I have a small panel in my truck dashbored that I keep pluged into my cigarette lighter when the truck isn't running to keep the battery charged. I can also plug it into my cell phone to keep it charged while I'm driving. It must be nice to have a roof full of panels. Someday I want to power my property with solar or anything that is green and safe like maybe wind too.


----------



## Zog (Apr 15, 2009)

ampman said:


> the govt. has no business being in private business


Amen to that! Yet they keep trying to. If you can't balance your own checkbook you have no reason attempting to run or finance a business.


----------



## Zog (Apr 15, 2009)

Justin L. said:


> Someday I want to power my property with solar or anything that is green and safe like maybe wind too.


So do I, and I don't think I am going out on a limb saying BBQ, Don, and everyone else here does too. But we just are not there yet for most people for it to be a sensible and economically viable solution with being funded by some other source (There are exceptions like a guy living on top of a volcano in HI). Everyone wants clean, safe, environmentally friendly energy, but it needs to be at least in the same ballpark economically. When it costs 5 times as much for something people change thier tune pretty fast (Unless they get incentives). 

Look at the Chevy Volt for example, when it first showed up at the Detroit auto show in 2007 everyone wanted one, the show car was good looking and predicted to be in the low $20k range. When it came out it was an ugly, cheap POS that cost $40,800 for a base model (Before the $7,500 federal tax rebate, sound familiar?)


----------



## Justin L. (Sep 6, 2011)

switchgear is boring anyway. I'd much rather hear about solar or even wind or maybe some hydro too. We need to progress as a race of humans not regress and that is what nuclear is doing to us. It;s ruining us. It's dangerous and so is coal. Dirty too.


----------



## don_resqcapt19 (Jul 18, 2010)

robnj772 said:


> Do some reading before you come in here causing trouble
> 
> http://www.flettexchange.com/index.php?page=prepaid
> 
> ...


That doesn't change anything for me. As far as not liking solar that is not the case. I just don't see it as a economically viable product at this time. Maybe someday, but that day is not here yet. 
I kind of see this like the early nuclear plants where the supporters were telling us that the power produced would be too cheap to meter.


----------



## Justin L. (Sep 6, 2011)

HARRY304E said:


> Have any facts to back that up?:blink:



http://www.coal-is-dirty.com/the-coal-hard-facts

http://www.physics.isu.edu/radinf/np-risk.htm


----------



## BBQ (Nov 16, 2010)

Justin L. said:


> http://www.coal-is-dirty.com/the-coal-hard-facts


There are very few 'facts' there, mostly just opinion ......... much like here. :laughing:


----------



## BBQ (Nov 16, 2010)

Justin L. said:


> We can argue back and forth about fact vs. opinion and we get nowhere. You must be biased just like zog.


I am biased, biased against lies and half truths

Coal is dirty, it does kill many. No one here except maybe Harry would dispute that.

But when the first thing I see on that web site is a link that says 'there has to be a better way' and starts talking about alternative energy they start pushing the lies and half truths.

I would love it if we could go full alternative energy right now, a huge amount of PV work would be nice right now. We could use the work.

But if you really look into it most of it is BS

1) Wind power ...... great clean. But because the wind is so changeable and we don't have a smart grid yet they still have to keep all the power plants on line so that that are ready the second the wind slows down

2) Solar, that would be great. Except that offten peak need is during dark hours here in the Northeast and we have yet to find a way to store that power well.

Then there is still the fact (and it is a fact) that the real ROI of PV systems is often so long it makes no sense.

All these artificial means of subsidizing it are just shell games, moving money from one persons pocket to another.

There are some here that seem to believe the subsidy money magically appears from nowhere and it does not, it is ripped from someones pocket and given to another person.


----------



## gold (Feb 15, 2008)

BBQ said:


> I have asked the same question, but my point was there are many here that are not electricians.
> 
> 
> And there shouldn't be
> ...


This comes down to ROI and the inclusion of deductions and credits to determine it. I really don't see what there is to prove. If he doesn't agree or thinks I am wrong then the burden is his to prove it. I posted real numbers in several threads so have others. He dismisses them and tries to discredit us.

Perhaps the best thing to do is contact some of the solar companies that advertise here and get there input. Then you don't need to take my word on anything.

I agree that there is too much negativity and concede I am a big part of it and made a very conscious effort not to in this thread.


----------



## BBQ (Nov 16, 2010)

gold said:


> This comes down to ROI and the inclusion of deductions and credits to determine it.


If I was selling PV to a customer I would certainly include all credits and rebates available to that customer to figure that customers ROI.

That is a given.


But, when we look at the big picture "Does PV really make sense for us a country?" we have to look at it on it's own merits and not with rebates. Those rebates / credits etc. regardless of coming from a Govt tax or out of the power company's bank account ultimately come out of every Americans pocket.


----------



## gold (Feb 15, 2008)

Zog said:


> I tell you what Gold, since you are so sure you are right why don't you invest the $1M or so I was looking to invest in a PV system for my building and you can have all of the revenue? In 8 years you will be rich if you are right, or in 25 years you will be paying it off still if I am right. Come on down, install the system at your expense, and I will sign over all the rights to you for the revenue the system generates.


What your talking about is a PPA and there are several companies in NC that will do just that. Call them.


----------



## gold (Feb 15, 2008)

BBQ said:


> If I was selling PV to a customer I would certainly include all credits and rebates available to that customer to figure that customers ROI.
> 
> That is a given.
> 
> ...


Surely your aware that every means of generation has had and in most cases still does receive tax dollars in one form or another. (I think coal is the only one that does not). Why do you think investing in the future of energy and jobs is a bad idea? Before the price of solar goes down production must go up. The incentives have been increasing production and successfully decreasing the cost of solar and creating jobs. The tax investments are paying off and are producing a new industry when we need it.


----------



## Zog (Apr 15, 2009)

gold said:


> What your talking about is a PPA and there are several companies in NC that will do just that. Call them.


That is not how I understood PPA's, but I could very well be wrong, been a long time since I looked at any PPA and never specifically for solar. Thanks for the advice, I will look into that.


----------



## B4T (Feb 10, 2009)

Forget all this solar energy crap.. save your money for a Bloom Box.. :thumbup:


----------



## BBQ (Nov 16, 2010)

gold said:


> Surely your aware that every means of generation has had and in most cases still does receive tax dollars in one form or another.


I have little doubt of that.

It changes nothing. 



> Why do you think investing in the future of energy and jobs is a bad idea?



I don't think that, I think it has to be done but it should be a choice not a force. 





> Before the price of solar goes down production must go up. The incentives have been increasing production and successfully decreasing the cost of solar and creating jobs. The tax investments are paying off and are producing a new industry when we need it.


Again we just have a basic disagreement on where the money should come from.


----------



## gold (Feb 15, 2008)

BBQ said:


> There are some here that seem to believe the subsidy money magically appears from nowhere and it does not, it is ripped from someones pocket and given to another person.


Bob no one has said that. What we are saying from the begining is that it isn't a COST to the tax payers because it has a RETURN. It is an INVESTMENT the same as every investment made into power generation in the history of power generation. 

Perhaps we could split the issue into two different threads, one where you two can discuss the political aspects and, the other we can call the alternative energy forum. 

oh wait ..


----------



## Speedy Petey (Jan 10, 2007)

OK, to prove to you that we really ARE trying, I reassembled this thread as best I could. I did not put back any of the insults and bickering and I think I got all the pertinent posts. 

Here's the thing. It is MUCH easier if you guys report posts as opposed to replying and starting pissing wars. THIS is how threads get locked or removed. I for one hate having to go in and read every word of every post to see who called whom what and looking for profanity or innuendo. After several pages of it I say screw it. Toss the whole thing.
Report it and we (mods) will all see it and each of us can give it our attention if necessary.


----------



## robnj772 (Jan 15, 2008)

What am I ? Chopped liver?


----------



## BBQ (Nov 16, 2010)

Before it closed I was going to post this

_As frustrating as it is to have a bunch of my posts deleted, It really ain't a big deal. It's just an Internet forum. 

Having had some moderator experience I can tell you it is imposable to make everyone happy, all you can hope for is moderately pissing off everyone from the sites owner to the members. In a thread like this it would have been almost imposable to delete just certain posts, or parts of certain posts without pissing people off. _

Now I will add thanks Speedy, I wonder if everyone will be satisfied now? :laughing:


----------



## gold (Feb 15, 2008)

BBQ said:


> I don't think that, I think it has to be done but it should be a choice not a force.
> 
> Tax dollars pay for many things people don't like. In this case the results are beginning to show it was a good investment. These programs started a thriving new market, jobs, increased domestic manufacturing, and lowered the cost of manufacturing by increasing the demand.
> 
> ...


What does this have to do with the numbers I used to calculate the ROI? Do you think they are less then accurate?


----------



## BBQ (Nov 16, 2010)

gold said:


> What does this have to do with the numbers I used to calculate the ROI? Do you think they are less then accurate?


I have explained that.

You are concerned with just the ROI to the customer getting the equipment. If I was trying to sell PV that is how I would look at it as well.

But I am concerned with the true ROI, call it the unsubsidized ROI, it is not there. 

You say 'the power companies pay for these credits', OK, where did that money come from? All of us. Now would it make more sense for the power company to spend the money on PV system credits or spend the money on their infrastructure? They are put in the position of having to fund these credits instead. 

Look at it however you want, I am not trying to stop you. But you sure seemed set against letting opposing views be expressed.


----------



## robnj772 (Jan 15, 2008)

Selling Power Back to the Grid 
*Pioneering individuals and small businesses are using sun, wind—even cow manure—to produce clean electricity and turn a profit*

Carl Baldino, a plant manager for a textile finishing company in Philadelphia, is moonlighting as a small-time energy tycoon. In his second job, he's got the kind of overhead most businesspeople can only dream of. His rooftop solar power generation system pays him an extra $3,000 per year on top of producing all the energy he needs to power his New Jersey home for free. The money comes from an emerging market in renewable energy credits (RECs), part of a program in many states where electricity suppliers that are required by law to invest in renewable energy buy tradable certificates from sources like Baldino. It's just one way individuals and small businesses are making money off clean energy

While the high cost of equipment, complicated state governing rules, and inefficiencies in the installation process still won't allow small-scale energy systems to compete directly with the established utilities, micro-energy production is paying off. With energy prices fluctuating and instability in many oil-producing countries, individuals and small businesses are touting the profits they're making off their wind, solar, and manure digestion systems as the wave of the future. These pioneers are finding that producing clean energy pays dividends that rival Wall Street (see BusinessWeek.com, 6/20/06, "Green Growth Areas for Entrepreneurs"). "There is a market that's growing, and we're just at the front end of it," says Heather Rhoads-Weaver, founder of eFormative Options LLC, a market-research consultancy for the wind power industry.

CREDITS FOR SALE. At this point, most states only allow customers to generate enough energy to cover their own needs. Through a process called net metering, an individual or business produces energy during the day, feeds it back into the grid, then gets credited for the amount of energy produced. Though customers can't yet sell electricity to other customers, since they're constrained by having to send their electricity through the existing grid, there are ways to make a profit. The most common way is through selling renewable-energy credits, which are credits clean-energy producers receive and sell to utilities so that utilities can meet their quotas for deriving energy from renewable sources.

*Brokers get in touch with local energy producers and purchase the credits, then aggregate them and sell them to the larger utilities. The producers usually get between $200 and $300 for every megawatt hour of energy they generate in a given year. They're not selling the energy itself, but instead are being rewarded for producing their energy cleanly and sustainably*.

Michael Mercurio, the president of Island Wind, a clean-energy consulting firm in Long Beach Island, N.J., is one of the pioneers. He currently has a solar energy production system on his home's roof and is about to install a small-scale wind turbine generator. "I don't make money from the sale of [the energy back to the grid or to the utility company], but from the renewable-energy-credit side of it," says Mercurio, who expects to make about $2,820 in total RECs this year, or $235 per megawatt hour he produces.

NOT YET STREAMLINED. The renewable-energy credit practice will continue to spread, as more and more states start to make it mandatory (see www.dsireusa.org, a Web site that lists selected incentives by state). By 2020, every utility will have to produce a percentage of its electricity through renewable means, says Andy Kruse, cofounder of Southwest Windpower, a producer of small-scale, consumer-size, wind-operated turbines, in Flagstaff, Ariz. If a utility doesn't produce as much as it's supposed to, it will be forced to pay a fine. The REC, or "green tag" as it's also called, is worth whatever that fine is, which varies from state to state.

*Normally, the companies that buy and sell credits want to buy them in bulk, but they have been buying them from individual homeowners and small businesses because they want to have a diversity of supply. "[The market for selling RECs] hasn't yet seen its potential. It hasn't yet developed into a streamlined process," says Rhoads-Weaver.*

And about 20% of utilities in the U.S. offer green pricing programs, where customers can pay a small premium to purchase renewable energy. But so far, only a few focus on facilitating smaller-scale, customer-generated energy. Most green pricing programs use energy from larger projects, like wind farms. Currently, the only way for individuals to sell their energy to consumers is through a program run via a utility that is designed to do so, says Blair Swezey, principal policy adviser at the National Renewable Energy Laboratory in Golden, Colo.

"COW POWER." Though only a few such programs exist, they're so far proving successful for the producers and popular with consumers. Central Vermont Public Service (CVPS), the largest of 22 utility companies in Vermont, recently started a program called "Cow Power," where dairy farms that install an advanced manure digestion system (a process that uses anaerobic digestion to yield usable methane gas while limiting its escape into the atmosphere) produce clean energy that is sold to consumers at a premium. The Blue Spruce Farm, run by the Audet family, was the first to install such a system in Vermont, but four more farms will come online in the next six to nine months.

Since first offering cow energy in early 2005, demand among consumers has been high. Today, 50 consumers a week are signing up, and 3,100 total households are enrolled in the program, says Steve Costello, a spokesperson for CVPS. "We've spent hardly anything on marketing," adds Costello.

And it's been good for the farmers. The Audet family has saved about $10,000 in electricity costs in the first year and made about $120,000 through the selling of the electricity. Through the program, the family is compensated at 95% the market rate. The total cost of installing the system was $1.2 million, but assorted grants and incentives covered almost half the cost. "It's still a pretty young project, but so far, all indications are that it is paying for itself," says Marie Audet, one of the owners of Blue Spruce Farm.

For small businesses like Blue Spruce Farm, the benefits go beyond increased revenue. With 1,000 adult cows and 1,000 young ones, the Audets have all but solved their manure disposal problem—and the manure digestion system leaves them liquid fertilizer for their crops. They even use the leftover solids as bedding for their cows.

WIND LIFTING OFF. The "Cow Power" program may provide one key way to save Vermont's traditional family farm. "The thing about this [energy production] part of the business is that it's consistent and constant, not at the mercy of the weather and the market. It's a predictable little endeavor," says Audet.

Though manure digestion and solar energy lend themselves to smaller-scale operations, wind power could be the next small thing. At the end of June, Southwest Windpower introduced a new small residential wind generator, the Skystream 3.7. It's the first fully integrated wind generator designed specifically for the grid-connected residential market, and it marks a significant step forward for tomorrow's small wind-farmers.

Wind can produce energy more efficiently than solar, and the residential or small-scale systems are getting less unsightly and safer than they used to be. Southwest produces 2,000 wind generators a month. That's up 70% from a year ago, and profits are expected to double from last year as well.

How soon will individual production of energy become a viable small business? Most likely when the cost of the equipment and the installation goes down, and the cost of energy from the major utility companies goes up. Meanwhile, those that have the systems already say their bets are hedged against the rising energy prices. "Every time the bill goes up from the electric company, my payback gets quicker," says Mercurio.

For today's clean energy pioneers, payback is quickly changing to paycheck.

http://www.businessweek.com/smallbiz/content/jul2006/sb20060706_167332.htm


----------



## B4T (Feb 10, 2009)

I just hope the OP doesn't think twice next time before posting pics..

The guy is new with only (17) posts and a brawl breaks out.. :laughing:

To the OP.. it is all done in fun..


----------



## robnj772 (Jan 15, 2008)

B4T said:


> I just hope the OP doesn't think twice next time before posting pics..
> 
> The guy is new with only (17) posts and a brawl breaks out.. :laughing:
> 
> To the OP.. it is all done in fun..


 
Yes that was one of my posts that got deleted


----------



## BBQ (Nov 16, 2010)

robnj772 said:


> Pioneering individuals and small businesses are using sun, wind—even cow manure—to produce clean electricity and turn a profit


No one has said profits cannot be made. The company I work for has made profits installing PV systems. 

But can you answer this?

How many of these pioneering individuals and small businesses have made a profit without taking advantage of the subsidies and credits offered?


----------



## robnj772 (Jan 15, 2008)

BBQ said:


> No one has said profits cannot be made. The company I work for has made profits installing PV systems.
> 
> But can you answer this?
> 
> How many of these pioneering individuals and small businesses have made a profit without taking advantage of the subsidies and credits offered?


Did you read the article or just the headline?

Sent from my iPad using ET Forum


----------



## BBQ (Nov 16, 2010)

robnj772 said:


> Did you read the article or just the headline?


Nope.

But unless that article can turn math on it's head there will not be much to it.


----------



## sority (Sep 6, 2011)

BBQ said:


> Nope.
> 
> But unless that article can turn math on it's head there will not be much to it.


You rock Bob, you rock. Tell them all how it is. Without you, the whole world would be swimming in a sea of ignorance. Thank you. I mean that.


----------



## gold (Feb 15, 2008)

BBQ said:


> I have explained that.
> 
> You are concerned with just the ROI to the customer getting the equipment. If I was trying to sell PV that is how I would look at it as well.
> 
> ...


Bob I never thought those views were entirely opposing. 

I think your opposition is too the RPA itself. That requires generators to produce a certain amount of power from varying sources, pay a fine for not complying, or by it in the form of SRECs.

The purpose of the RPA is to produce more clean energy and reduce our dependency on foreign oil. That cost money, don't confuse the cost as a cost of "SOLAR" as much it is a cost of clean energy in general.


----------



## gold (Feb 15, 2008)

BBQ said:


> No one has said profits cannot be made. The company I work for has made profits installing PV systems.
> 
> But can you answer this?
> 
> How many of these pioneering individuals and small businesses have made a profit without taking advantage of the subsidies and credits offered?


All of them have made profits from it, that is the engine that drives the industry.

The question should be how much clean energy has been produced now and will be produced in the future thanks to the investments made today.


----------



## gold (Feb 15, 2008)

robnj772 said:


> Selling Power Back to the Grid
> *Pioneering individuals and small businesses are using sun, wind—even cow manure—to produce clean electricity and turn a profit*
> 
> Carl Baldino, a plant manager for a textile finishing company in Philadelphia, is moonlighting as a small-time energy tycoon. In his second job, he's got the kind of overhead most businesspeople can only dream of. His rooftop solar power generation system pays him an extra $3,000 per year on top of producing all the energy he needs to power his New Jersey home for free. The money comes from an emerging market in renewable energy credits (RECs), part of a program in many states where electricity suppliers that are required by law to invest in renewable energy buy tradable certificates from sources like Baldino. It's just one way individuals and small businesses are making money off clean energy
> ...


thats something that hasn't even really been mentioned here. All these numbers being thrown around aren't really taking into consideration what the price of electric will be in 3 years or 5 years or 7 years or 10 years. 

I'm trying to find a non biased source with a projection of future cost.


----------



## Justin L. (Sep 6, 2011)

I think you should just admit that you are employed or lobbied by the solar industry already.


----------



## Skinnyelectrician (Aug 10, 2011)

Justin L. said:


> I think you should just admit that you are employed or lobbied by the solar industry already.


But if he agreed with you, blindly, then he'd be OK right?


The man is talking facts and numbers. Not what is or isn't "right" based of some political opinion or agenda.


----------



## don_resqcapt19 (Jul 18, 2010)

Gold,
Lets try it this way. If a house in north central Illinois would use 17,900 kWh in a year, what size system would you recommend? How much would the installation cost? (deduct the tax credits). How many kWh would it produce in a year? What would be the value of the SRECs in a year?


----------



## Zog (Apr 15, 2009)

Don, this is a useful tool
http://rredc.nrel.gov/solar/calculators/PVWATTS/version1/


----------



## Justin L. (Sep 6, 2011)

Skinnyelectrician said:


> But if he agreed with you, blindly, then he'd be OK right?
> 
> 
> The man is talking facts and numbers. Not what is or isn't "right" based of some political opinion or agenda.



Of course he would be ok then. Anyone who agrees with me is ok in my book.


----------



## gold (Feb 15, 2008)

don_resqcapt19 said:


> Gold,
> Lets try it this way. If a house in north central Illinois would use 17,900 kWh in a year, what size system would you recommend? How much would the installation cost? (deduct the tax credits). How many kWh would it produce in a year? What would be the value of the SRECs in a year?


There is no SREC market there unless your in ComEd territory and you could trade them in PA at $25 each and the ROI would probably be too long to make it worth it.




Zog said:


> Don, this is a useful tool
> http://rredc.nrel.gov/solar/calculators/PVWATTS/version1/


That doesn't calculate the value of the SRECs or the tax incentive.


----------



## Zog (Apr 15, 2009)

gold said:


> That doesn't calculate the value of the SRECs or the tax incentive.


Right, it just shows the true payback without any funding.


----------



## kaboler (Dec 1, 2010)

I think you Americans should keep buying oil from muslim countries that hate you.


----------



## HARRY304E (Sep 15, 2010)

kaboler said:


> I think you Americans should keep buying oil from muslim countries that hate you.


How about you just start digging and get us some..:laughing:


----------



## HARRY304E (Sep 15, 2010)

B4T said:


> I just hope the OP doesn't think twice next time before posting pics..
> 
> The guy is new with only (17) posts and a brawl breaks out.. :laughing:
> 
> To the OP.. it is all done in fun..


I'll bet he is very proud that his thread has gone on this long...:laughing::laughing:


----------



## kaboler (Dec 1, 2010)

HARRY304E said:


> How about you just start digging and get us some..:laughing:


We're going as fast as we can! But the point remains. If the government is going to spend a trillion dollars here and there, they could throw money at something like clean energy. Though I prefer wind over solar.


----------



## MF Dagger (Dec 24, 2007)

kaboler said:


> We're going as fast as we can! But the point remains. If the government is going to spend a trillion dollars here and there, they could throw money at something like clean energy. Though I prefer wind over solar.


That's because you're full of hot air.


----------



## HARRY304E (Sep 15, 2010)

kaboler said:


> We're going as fast as we can! But the point remains. If the government is going to spend a trillion dollars here and there, they could throw money at something like clean energy. Though I prefer wind over solar.


They can certainly spend some on R&D but we need to use what works now and do the R&D when we have full employment not during a full fledged Depression


----------



## BBQ (Nov 16, 2010)

gold said:


> That doesn't calculate the value of the SRECs or the tax incentive.


Which means it shows the true ROI.


----------



## cabletie (Feb 12, 2011)

According to an article in the electrical contractor magazine, there is a report from the UN that renewables could become the predominant source of electricity by 2050 and a best case scenario 0f 80%. I am not a "greenie" but I don’t see this as a bad thing and I don’t notice my pockets getting pinched. We have a power plant here that is going to see its last refueling soon. Once it is gone so are a lot of good paying jobs. It is too bad they will never build another one like it around here again. So where will the new Jobs come from? Now if we were talking about bio fuels I would have a whole different opinion on wasted money.


----------



## don_resqcapt19 (Jul 18, 2010)

gold said:


> There is no SREC market there unless your in ComEd territory and you could trade them in PA at $25 each and the ROI would probably be too long to make it worth it. ...


And if I was in ComEd territory, would it pay?


----------



## don_resqcapt19 (Jul 18, 2010)

cabletie said:


> According to an article in the electrical contractor magazine, there is a report from the UN that renewables could become the predominant source of electricity by 2050 and a best case scenario 0f 80%. ...


Who wrote the article? Most of the information out there is coming from sources that have an economic interest in solar power. There are very few articles from independent sources.


----------



## Zog (Apr 15, 2009)

kaboler said:


> I think you Americans should keep buying oil from muslim countries that hate you.


What does oil have to do with this conversation?


----------



## eutecticalloy (Dec 12, 2010)

The fbi just raided the solyndra....hmmmmmmm???


----------



## Zog (Apr 15, 2009)

eutecticalloy said:


> The fbi just raided the solyndra....hmmmmmmm???


Hope they find that $535 Million Obama gave them


----------



## robnj772 (Jan 15, 2008)

Zog said:


> Hope they find that $535 Million Obama gave them


 
Actually they weren't just handed the money the energey dept just guaranteed the loan. 

They claim that they can not compete with Chinese companies,just like alot of the other companies will trying to produce goods in our county.

Don't get too exctied, this story is more about overseas competion and a bad economy then the topic which is solar.


----------



## robnj772 (Jan 15, 2008)

don_resqcapt19 said:


> Who wrote the article? Most of the information out there is coming from sources that have an economic interest in solar power. There are very few articles from independent sources.


 
Just like some on the negativity against this section of the forum are coming from someone who has an economic interest in Nuke power vrs solar

Stop trying to bring politics into this,if you want to talk politics I think there is a forum for that over at www.contractortalk.com


----------



## gold (Feb 15, 2008)

Zog said:


> Right, it just shows the true payback without any funding.


It shows the payback without any funding but thats more like a "halftruth" payback.

I measure ROI in terms of the return on the individuals investment. You on the other hand are measuring it in terms of burden to the community (assuming your not just using the total cost argument to further some other agenda). Lets look at that cost to the community then.



> According to the U.S. Department of Energy there are two main reasons why renewable energy technologies offer an economic advantage: (1) they are labor-intensive, so they generally create more jobs per dollar invested than conventional electricity generation technologies, and (2) they use primarily indigenous resources,* so most of the energy dollars can be kept at home*.


quoted from
http://stalix.com/Solar Energy Job Creation.pdf

The entire recovery and reinvestment act has cost to date 299 billion dollars with less then 20 billion spent on clean energy (10 residential and 7 commercial) through tax incentives.
http://www.recovery.gov/pages/default.aspx

The solar market is expected to be a 276 billion dollar industry by 2020
http://www.seia.org/galleries/pdf/Navigant Consulting Report 9.15.08.pdf
So it looks like a 1000%+ ROI on that tax money in 12 years. Seems like it would be irresponsible not to make that investment WHILE creating jobs in this economy.



HARRY304E said:


> They can certainly spend some on R&D but we need to use what works now and do the R&D when we have full employment not during a full fledged Depression


That R&D money comes from production. Nuclear energy is what 30% efficient? Compared to solar at 22? What were the efficiency's of nuclear and hydro when we first started building those plants? Was it even over 15%? Your wrong here we needed to get them into production to create a market to drive those cost down and *PRODUCE JOBS* which it did both.

Everything those tax investments were intended to do they have done and are doing. They are creating an industry that will reduce our dependency on fossil fuels. Create Jobs. Slow the export of wealth to foreign holding companies. Produce an exportable product. Reduce our carbon footprint for our kids and grandkids. 

If your going to disregard that pesky little tax investment when you calculate the ROI your way figure out a way to subtract all the benefits given by them as well. 

Speaking in terms of cost to the country of course.


BBQ said:


> Which means it shows the true ROI.


:bangin::bangin:


----------



## Zog (Apr 15, 2009)

(2) they use primarily indigenous resources,* so most of the energy dollars can be kept at home*.

Hmmmm, last I checked most of the solar panels were being made in China as your friend Rob just pointed out


robnj772 said:


> Actually they weren't just handed the money the energey dept just guaranteed the loan.
> 
> They claim that they can not compete with Chinese companies,just like alot of the other companies will trying to produce goods in our county.
> 
> Don't get too exctied, this story is more about overseas competion and a bad economy then the topic which is solar.


----------



## gold (Feb 15, 2008)

Zog said:


> (2) they use primarily indigenous resources,* so most of the energy dollars can be kept at home*.
> 
> Hmmmm, last I checked most of the solar panels were being made in China.


Then perhaps you don't know as much about the solar industry as you think you do.


----------



## Zog (Apr 15, 2009)

gold said:


> Then perhaps you don't know as much about the solar industry as you think you do.


Then neither does your friend Rob, he just said it, and he is right. 

http://solveclimatenews.com/news/20...facturing-united-states-polysilicon-producers

"When Robert Bushman sold his California polysilicon recycling company in 2006, China controlled just 10 percent of global solar panel production. Four years later—after he'd bought the business back from a German firm—China's share had leaped to more than 50 percent, and it is still growing fast. "


----------



## gold (Feb 15, 2008)

Zog said:


> Then neither does your friend Rob, he just said it, and he is right.
> 
> http://solveclimatenews.com/news/20...facturing-united-states-polysilicon-producers
> 
> "When Robert Bushman sold his California polysilicon recycling company in 2006, China controlled just 10 percent of global solar panel production. Four years later—after he'd bought the business back from a German firm—China's share had leaped to more than 50 percent, and it is still growing fast. "


Of the world market yes but there are more companies opening up right here in the US every year. 2 right here in Jersey in the last year or so but what does this have to do with this topic? Are we just going to argue until you find a way to win?


----------



## piperunner (Aug 22, 2009)

Well nice work at least you posted your work strap or no strap you can always finish that right .

Again great looking work clean and neat i dont see any work yet from others who complain about folks who show there projects and post there work .


Enjoyed it lets see more solar stuff !!!


----------



## Englishsparky (Nov 6, 2010)

Why would anyone post pictures of solar when there posts just get attacked. Look at post 4 here for agendas and bias.
http://www.electriciantalk.com/f32/new-alternative-energy-forum-topic-25822/


----------



## robnj772 (Jan 15, 2008)

Englishsparky said:


> Why would anyone post pictures of solar when there posts just get attacked. Look at post 4 here for agendas and bias.
> http://www.electriciantalk.com/f32/new-alternative-energy-forum-topic-25822/


It's a damn shame too

Sent from my iPad using ET Forum


----------



## Dennis Alwon (May 9, 2009)

Englishsparky said:


> Why would anyone post pictures of solar when there posts just get attacked. Look at post 4 here for agendas and bias.
> http://www.electriciantalk.com/f32/new-alternative-energy-forum-topic-25822/


Unfortunately it seems to be the way of this entire forum. People post pictures of there work and get attacked all the time. I think I do pretty decent work but I have no interest in posting it so someone can tell me I have a strap 1/2" too far or question my decision to use copper etc...


----------



## Zog (Apr 15, 2009)

gold said:


> Of the world market yes but there are more companies opening up right here in the US every year. 2 right here in Jersey in the last year or so but what does this have to do with this topic? Are we just going to argue until you find a way to win?


What does this have to do with this topic?:blink: You just posted in bold letters most of the energy dollars can be kept at home, I just called BS. Not to mention Rob just had said the US manufactures can't compete with Chineese manufactures.


----------



## gold (Feb 15, 2008)

In fairness to my ever growing club of haters no one actually said anything overly condemning of his actual work. Most of the negativity has been toward the concept of solar in general.


----------



## Jlarson (Jun 28, 2009)

Solar fight!! :laughing::laughing:


----------



## gold (Feb 15, 2008)

Zog said:


> What does this have to do with this topic?:blink: You just posted in bold letters most of the energy dollars can be kept at home, I just called BS. Not to mention Rob just had said the US manufactures can't compete with Chineese manufactures.


Zog start at page 1. Get back on track. Pick an argument and stick with it, your jumping all over the place now.


----------



## Zog (Apr 15, 2009)

Englishsparky said:


> Why would anyone post pictures of solar when there posts just get attacked. Look at post 4 here for agendas and bias.
> http://www.electriciantalk.com/f32/new-alternative-energy-forum-topic-25822/


You obviously can't read, in fact I was the first to respond to his photos with this. 


Zog said:


> Looks good, how much that cost them? Maybe I put one on my building


Then the OP stated the cost, then I asked if my calculations were correct after rebates and annual projected production. 

Gold responds with SERC paybacks

I ask for more information on that because when researching installing a system on my roof I did not find any info on SREC's in NC. 

Gold tells me to go do my own research, which I already had so I ask for a link the the NC SREC program he keeps refering to, gold starts with the insults and never provides any links. It all goes downhill from there. 

So I am not the negative one here, I am trying to justify putting a system on my new building, but the math just does not seem to work here in NC, so I am not about to go to the board of directors to buy a PV system because some guy on ET forum said it had a 8 year ROI. 

I have tried to have a decent discussion here, but every time I bring up a point on the economics some jerk jumps in with some insult or stupid assumption about my motives. The only thing you guys have done is convince me the ROI in my state is not worth the investment and I should be very weary of anything a PV contractor tells me.


----------



## gold (Feb 15, 2008)

Zog said:


> You obviously can't read, in fact I was the first to respond to his photos with this.
> 
> 
> Then the OP stated the cost, then I asked if my calculations were correct after rebates and annual projected production.
> ...


*BS BS BS BS*
I NEVER insulted you or anyone else in this thread *YOU LIAR!!* I did the exact opposite and specifically stated that I was not going to. *LIAR!!* If you look I never said THIS system would have an 8 year ROI *YOU LIAR* and I DID post links to with an explanation Of the NCRECS *YOU LIAR* I politely answerd every BS post you replied with and included links at the end. *YOU ARE A LIAR* 

You can twist this any way you want Zog. I answered every objection you had and you evaded those answers. *You Sir ARE A LIAR*


----------



## robnj772 (Jan 15, 2008)

Zog said:


> You obviously can't read, in fact I was the first to respond to his photos with this.
> .


That was a baited comment and you know it liar

Sent from my iPad using ET Forum


----------



## robnj772 (Jan 15, 2008)

Dennis Alwon said:


> Unfortunately it seems to be the way of this entire forum. People post pictures of there work and get attacked all the time. I think I do pretty decent work but I have no interest in posting it so someone can tell me I have a strap 1/2" too far or question my decision to use copper etc...


Hell why would anyone even want to post anything on this forum?

You get attacked,someone derails the thread,you comments gets spun out of the solar system.

Sent from my iPad using ET Forum


----------



## Speedy Petey (Jan 10, 2007)

robnj772 said:


> Hell why would anyone even want to post anything on this forum?
> 
> You get attacked,someone derails the thread,you comments gets spun out of the solar system.


They WHY are you still here???


----------



## gold (Feb 15, 2008)

robnj772 said:


> you comments gets spun out of the solar system.
> 
> Sent from my iPad using ET Forum


I see what you did there

:thumbsup::laughing:


----------



## gold (Feb 15, 2008)

Speedy Petey said:


> They WHY are you still here???


I don't think he was being serious.


Man you guys got itchy trigger fingers lately.


----------



## robnj772 (Jan 15, 2008)

Speedy Petey said:


> They WHY are you still here???


Well 

- it's kinda entertaining there ain't **** on tv
- I kinda think that the majority of the members on here feel the same and I keep hoping that something will be done about it

I mean ( I asked this before but never got an answer)

The op of this thread, if you were him would you ever come back in here?

Sent from my iPad using ET Forum


----------



## Speedy Petey (Jan 10, 2007)

gold said:


> I don't think he was being serious.
> 
> 
> Man you guys got itchy trigger fingers lately.


Looked pretty serious to me. 
And I didn't pull any triggers. I just replied. :whistling2:

Man you guys are sensitive lately.


----------



## Zog (Apr 15, 2009)

gold said:


> *BS BS BS BS*
> I NEVER insulted you or anyone else in this thread *YOU LIAR!!*


 They were deleted by the moderator, but I believe you said "GFYS"


gold said:


> *LIAR!!* If you look I never said THIS system would have an 8 year ROI


Sorry, you said 8-10


gold said:


> The $125k - $175k it generates in SRECs.
> 
> 2.5M system cost
> 1.75 M after federal tax incentives
> ...





gold said:


> *YOU LIAR* and I DID post links to with an explanation Of the NCRECS


 Never saw that link, went back and checked again, no link, you just said do your own research. 


gold said:


> *YOU LIAR* I politely answerd every BS post you replied with and included links at the end. *YOU ARE A LIAR*


 You did seem to try to be polite in some of your posts, I could tell you were making an effort and so was I, really it was the other guys getting you all spun up and yet some other other guys getting me spun up with thier comments about nuclear (Which I still don;t see how it is related to this tpoic or me, I am a switchgear guy, I don't care where the power comes from). 

But I don't recall any links from you. 


gold said:


> You can twist this any way you want Zog. I answered every objection you had and you evaded those answers. *You Sir ARE A LIAR*


 I am not the one twisting anything, I am looking for real answers to questions I have about installing a similar system to the OP on my building, I am not the one evading answers, I don't have any idea where you get that from. I am not a liar at all, so you can stop calling me that, it really seems like you are throwing a tantrum on the floor as you are typing, your imaturity keeps shocking me. From telling me to hang myself, wishing me great harm, calling me a liar, I have a really hard time believing you are not 12. 

Oh, and I am sure you were also the one that created a fake user name and started with the real threats via PM. Nice.


----------



## Zog (Apr 15, 2009)

robnj772 said:


> That was a baited comment and you know it liar
> 
> Sent from my iPad using ET Forum


No, that was a serious comment, and I have had a very good discussion about the system I am looking to instal in a different place on the web where the discussion has been very professional and the real experts have been very helpful. While Gold and I dasagree on many things at least he seems to know a lot about PV systems and the economics of systems in his state, you sir, have yet to contribute anything that I can recall of any value besides insults and a couple paragraphs you copied and pasted from some very biased sites.


----------



## robnj772 (Jan 15, 2008)

Zog said:


> No, that was a serious comment, and I have had a very good discussion about the system I am looking to instal in a different place on the web where the discussion has been very professional and the real experts have been very helpful. While Gold and I dasagree on many things at least he seems to know a lot about PV systems and the economics of systems in his state, you sir, have yet to contribute anything that I can recall of any value besides insults and a couple paragraphs you copied and pasted from some very biased sites.


That's because
- I really don't care to waste my time ,you won't listen anyway
- gold took the reigns and gave you lots of good info that you and ur buddy BBQ chose to ignore( see my first reason )

Sent from my iPad using ET Forum


----------



## gold (Feb 15, 2008)

Speedy Petey said:


> Looked pretty serious to me.
> And I didn't pull any triggers. I just replied. :whistling2:
> 
> Man you guys are sensitive lately.


Was that humor? :thumbup:



Zog said:


> They were deleted by the moderator, but I believe you said "GFYS"
> 
> and you sir are wrong I said no such thing in this thread you can have a mod check if you like as they save every post that was deleted.
> Sorry, you said 8-10
> ...


Your sure of that are you? So sure that you would openly make that accusation? 

I have never in my history of this forum created an alt account for any reason. Nor have I ever sent any harassing email to any one or for that matter I have never said anything in an email that I would not have said in an open forum.

I am no doubt a bit of an ass. I conceded already I contribute to a lot of the negativity. I am certain tho at least one mod here knows enough about IP that at least one of them can attest that my IP has not changed and there is only 1 account associated with it.

I doubt you received any email and personally think you are full of it and your trying to discredit me any way you can to win an argument.


----------



## Dennis Alwon (May 9, 2009)

Zog said:


> Oh, and I am sure you were also the one that created a fake user name and started with the real threats via PM. Nice.


This statement is not fair unless you know 100%. Maybe it was Gold but I suspect it was not-- not his MO so please don't accuse members like this.

BTW I typed this before I read Golds comment


----------



## gold (Feb 15, 2008)

Dennis Alwon said:


> This statement is not fair unless you know 100%. Maybe it was Gold but I suspect it was not-- not his MO so please don't accuse members like this.


+1

Thank You


----------



## Jeff Henry (Sep 8, 2011)

don_resqcapt19 said:


> Who wrote the article? Most of the information out there is coming from sources that have an economic interest in solar power. There are very few articles from independent sources.


my article is better than your article.


----------



## Zog (Apr 15, 2009)

gold said:


> Your sure of that are you? So sure that you would openly make that accusation?
> 
> I have never in my history of this forum created an alt account for any reason. Nor have I ever sent any harassing email to any one or for that matter I have never said anything in an email that I would not have said in an open forum.
> 
> ...


Well I traced it to a NJ IP address and it obviously stemmed from the last thread we butted heads in. If it was not you then I apologize, but it sure seems to be quite a coincidence. I reported the PM's to Nathan and the user was removed.


----------



## gold (Feb 15, 2008)

Zog said:


> Well I traced it to a NJ IP address and it obviously stemmed from the last thread we butted heads in. If it was not you then I apologize, but it sure seems to be quite a coincidence. I reported the PM's to Nathan and the user was removed.





gold said:


> I doubt you received any email and personally think you are full of it and your trying to discredit me any way you can to win an argument.


^^^^^^^^


----------



## steelersman (Mar 15, 2009)

I got some new oxygen to throw on the proverbial "fire" perhaps......perhaps not:

*By Keith Bradsher*

*The New York Times*

*Published: September 1, 2011 *

HONG KONG — The bankruptcies of three American solar power companies in the last month, including Solyndra of California on Wednesday, have left China’s industry with a dominant sales position — almost three-fifths of the world’s production capacity — and rapidly declining costs. 
Solar panel inspection at a factory in Hangzhou, Zhejiang province. Chinese companies' cost advantages overwhelm any lags in technology, analysts say. 
Some American, Japanese and European solar companies still have a technological edge over Chinese rivals, but seldom a cost advantage, according to industry analysts. 
Loans at very low rates from state-owned banks in Beijing, cheap or free land from local and provincial governments across China, huge economies of scale and other cost advantages have transformed China from a minor player in the solar power industry just a few years ago into the main producer of an increasingly competitive source of electricity. 
“The top-tier Chinese firms are kind of the benchmark now,” said Shayle Kann, a managing director of solar power studies at GTM Research, a renewable energy market analysis firm based in Boston. Pricing of solar equipment is determined by the Chinese industry, he said, “and everyone else prices at a premium or discount to them.” 
Besides Solyndra, the other two American manufacturers that filed for bankruptcy in August were Evergreen Solar, of Massachusetts, and SpectraWatt, a New York company. Another company, BP Solar, halted manufacturing at its complex in Frederick, Md., last spring. 
Those bankruptcies and closings represent almost one-fifth of the solar panel manufacturing capacity in the United States, according to GTM Research. 
Solyndra and Evergreen in particular suffered because they pursued unusual technologies whose competitiveness depended on their using less polysilicon, the main material for solar panels. That has become less important because polysilicon prices have tumbled more than 80 percent in the last three years as output has caught up with demand. 
Analysts say that two American companies remain strongly placed. One is First Solar, the largest American manufacturer, which uses a different technology but has its biggest factory in Malaysia. The other, SunPower, is much smaller but is an industry leader in the efficiency with which its panels convert sunlight into electricity, so that they sell at a premium to Chinese panels. 
But with Beijing heavily supporting its industry, the Chinese companies are forging ahead. 
“There is no question that renewable energy companies in the United States feel pressure from China,” said David B. Sandalow, the assistant secretary for policy and international affairs at the United States Energy Department. “Many of them say it is cheap capital, not cheap labor, that gives Chinese companies the main competitive advantage.” 
China’s three biggest solar power companies — Suntech Power, Yingli Green Energy and Trina Solar — have all in the last two weeks announced second-quarter sales increases of 33 to 63 percent from a year earlier. 
Yingli and Trina were also profitable in the quarter. Suntech posted a loss, mostly because it broke a longstanding agreement to buy solar wafers — critical components in the manufacturing process — from a Singapore affiliate of MEMC Electronic Materials of Missouri. Suntech aims to make more wafers itself. 
Shares in large and small Chinese solar power companies have mostly rallied in the last two weeks on the New York and Hong Kong stock markets, as investors have welcomed their strong quarterly results and the prospect of dwindling competition from Western rivals. Besides the bankruptcies in the United States, solar power companies in Germany, another big producer, have been laying off workers and retrenching. 
The recent strength of Chinese stocks “truly reflects the low cost base of the Chinese solar manufacturers, and it is great to see their positioning, particularly relative to their American and European counterparts,” said K. K. Chan, the chief executive of Nature Elements Capital, a Chinese clean energy investment company based in Beijing.


----------



## MF Dagger (Dec 24, 2007)

Too many words.


----------



## Zog (Apr 15, 2009)

:clap:Lets hear it for that stimulus package, woot woot!:clap:


----------



## don_resqcapt19 (Jul 18, 2010)

robnj772 said:


> Just like some on the negativity against this section of the forum are coming from someone who has an economic interest in Nuke power vrs solar
> 
> Stop trying to bring politics into this,if you want to talk politics I think there is a forum for that over at www.contractortalk.com


Its not politics. The source of the information is very important. The first think I look at when I read an article is who the writer is paid by. Yes all parts of the electrical industry have their paid shills, and all put out information that is very biased in favor of who is paying them. It is very difficult to find any independent reliable source of information on anything where there are multiple points of view.


----------



## robnj772 (Jan 15, 2008)

don_resqcapt19 said:


> Its not politics. The source of the information is very important. The first think I look at when I read an article is who the writer is paid by. Yes all parts of the electrical industry have their paid shills, and all put out information that is very biased in favor of who is paying them. It is very difficult to find any independent reliable source of information on anything where there are multiple points of view.


 
No

It is politics and also a thread derailment.

You solar haters need to stop derailing these threads. You and your buddy zog are way off topic.

There are some that would like to be alble to discuss alternative energey without putting up with this negative,polititcal, off topic crap.

You have trashed a new members thread. The guy posted pics of his work because he was proud of the job he did and then BBQ started nit picking he workmanship then you 2 started in on all the political bull****.

It's a damn shame because this forum could use more members like that but he is long gone and I am sure will not be back.

We all know that guys like you an zog are just against solar and green energy. We all know what the facts are about SRECS and tax credits *AND THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE 2*. 

I am not sure where your biased is coming from but I damn sure know where zogs is from.

Stop this bull****


----------



## BBQ (Nov 16, 2010)

robnj772 said:


> No
> 
> It is politics and also a thread derailment.
> 
> ...


You really need to get back on your medications.

If this forum is bothering you so much then the answer is not to look at it. 

You can't stop people from giving opinions you do not agree with.


----------



## cabletie (Feb 12, 2011)

> The source of the information is very important


It was a report in May by the united nation's intergovernmental panel on climate change. Ok so that does seem biased.


> From ecmag
> The document "special report on renewable energy sources and climate change mitigation", reflects the findings of more than 120 researchers who collaborated on the study.


I guess it is hard to predict climate change if you don't try to figure what will be in the climate in the future. So that part I don't think would be biased, and is just an educated guess on how much energy will be produced by renewables in 50 years. Personaly I don't know what to believe about climate change and did not want to bring that into this thread. I just wuonder where the future jobs will be. It looks like it won't be wiring new factories that make solar panels!

I threw in the part about biofuels because I understand they use more energy than they produce (Unlike solar) and get government money.


----------



## B4T (Feb 10, 2009)

I wonder how this could happen with _your_ money.. :no::no::no: http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/video/solyndra-energy-firm-raided-by-fbi-14475978


----------



## HARRY304E (Sep 15, 2010)

B4T said:


> I wonder how this could happen with _your_ money.. :no::no::no: http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/video/solyndra-energy-firm-raided-by-fbi-14475978


Hey it's only $535,000,000 for them to line there pockets and move all the jobs to china just like the solar company in mass they took the money then fired all their mass employees and moved to china.:no::no:
http://www.masslive.com/news/index...._massachusetts_subsidies_evergreen_solar.html

STATE HOUSE, BOSTON – Evergreen Solar Inc., once a poster-company for Gov. Deval Patrick's 
green-jobs agenda, announced plans on Tuesday to shutter its Devens manufacturing plant and move more than 800 jobs elsewhere after accepting $58 million in state subsidies to expand in Massachusetts.
The solar panel manufacturing plant cited the low cost of manufacturing in China as the primary reason for closing the plant little more than two years after accepting significant state inducements for expanding.
"We are disappointed to learn about Evergreen Solar's decision to close its Devens facility. 
The company has worked hard to compete against heavily subsidized foreign competition and to live up to its commitments to the Commonwealth," said Secretary of Housing and Economic Development Greg Bialecki in a statement.
Patrick announced the expansion of Evergreen Solar at the former Army base in Devens to great fanfare in 2008 when the company pledged to the double the size of the manufacturing plant it was constructing and triple its workforce to 1,000 employees

There seems to be a pattern here.

Here is more of them taking the money then closing up and moving to china.
http://bigpeace.com/ier/2011/08/24/...losing-shop-in-us-production-moving-overseas/


----------



## gold (Feb 15, 2008)

steelersman said:


> I got some new oxygen to throw on the proverbial "fire" perhaps......perhaps not:
> 
> *By Keith Bradsher*
> 
> ...


This is a great topic but can you start a new thread with it?


Zog said:


> :clap:Lets hear it for that stimulus package, woot woot!:clap:


Lets here it for Zog derailing a thread with politics and getting away with it. :thumbdown:
You will do anything to win an argument won't you? Lie, drag it off topic, make false accusations, violate the TOS ...



don_resqcapt19 said:


> Its not politics. The source of the information is very important. The first think I look at when I read an article is who the writer is paid by. Yes all parts of the electrical industry have their paid shills, and all put out information that is very biased in favor of who is paying them. It is very difficult to find any independent reliable source of information on anything where there are multiple points of view.


Yes every POLITICIAN has there own AGENDA and all media sources are biased toward one side or another.




robnj772 said:


> No
> 
> *It is politics* and also a thread derailment.
> 
> ...


Your right and I hate to say it but if we can't keep it on topic maybe it should just be closed.



BBQ said:


> You really need to get back on your medications.
> Personal attack
> If this forum is bothering you so much then the answer is not to look at it.
> and that goes both ways he is asking that it stay on topic you however are steering it off.
> ...







HARRY304E said:


> Hey it's only $535,000,000 for them to line there pockets and move all the jobs to china just like the solar company in mass they took the money then fired all their mass employees and moved to china.:no::no:
> http://www.masslive.com/news/index...._massachusetts_subsidies_evergreen_solar.html
> 
> STATE HOUSE, BOSTON – Evergreen Solar Inc., once a poster-company for Gov. Deval Patrick's
> ...


Great points Harry but can you start another thread with it?

I think I am done with this thread.


----------

