Yes, per Forbes.
2007-04-06 09:46:10
·
answer #1
·
answered by Brian L 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
Solar panels definately pay for themselves--in most areas, anyway. As to sources, the best thing is to simply do a search and look at some of the vendor websites for details--but below is a general overview.
A few years ago, they were REALLY expensive (though in areas like the Southwest, stilll worthwhile). The price has dropped in half in the last few years--and is likely to fall further in the near future. Currently the cost is (average) about $4/watt.
Here's an example: Suppose you wanted a 2000 watt (2 kW) system. That would cost about $8000. That's a fair amount of power--and would cut your power bill way down. If you saved$100/month, it would pay for itself in less than 7 years (that's net savings, after maintainanence, which is very low). That's a bit much for a lot of people. However, most banks, etc. see this as a home improvement (adding to the value of your home--so its more of an investment thanan expense)--and will finance on that basis. So for most people, its very practical. Also--many people get much better cost savings--thats fairly conservative.
A few homeowners around the nation have taken this a step further by installing lsystems large enough to not only provide daytime power but to charge storage batteries for nighttime power--taking themseles entirely or almost entirely off the power grid. That is also expensive--and I'm not sure how cost-effective it is at this point, although it may be a practical option in the future.
2007-04-06 10:28:12
·
answer #2
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
anything that you have to spend money on an appliance then save money be operating it compared to a more expensive operation, you will save you money over time. solar is no exception. the problem is how much time are you asking about. there are also other factors including where you live and how much electricity you use.
right now, a solar hot water heater in the south where i live will run about $3,000 and save me about $30 a month. So, including the amount i could have made investing the difference as one of your other answers pointed out, it will take between 8 and 9 years.
there are homes built now that for an extra $20,000 - $40,000 and up can go completely 'off the grid' and, using a combination of sources such as solar and geothermal, not pay any bills to the utility company. but again the payback depends on individual energy usage.
solar is getting cheaper every year as fossil fuels continue to become more costly and investment by more people in the growing solar energy industry, like a lot of other industries, will help to keep the costs decreasing in the years to come.
but for those folks concerned about the future of the environment, there is another reward for using renewable energy then just the pay back in cash.
2007-04-06 10:12:17
·
answer #3
·
answered by Basta Ya 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
California does not have a favored feed-in tariff like many European countries. The key in your question is that you specify a small home. A small, energy-efficient bungalow of 600 or 900 square feet is not going to get much benefit from solar electric, as there simply is not enough to be saved. Solar has a somewhat fixed cost for the inverter (a 5000-watt one costs only a little more than a 3000-watt one) and installation (installing 6 kW of panels costs only a little more than 2 kW). So the homes that benefit financially from solar are the large ones that use a lot of power, the people who run air conditioners and swimming pool pumps. Southern California has cheap electricity in comparison to Northern. I see a baseline rate for SCE of 4.5 cents/kWh, but at 131% of baseline, that quadruples. At 200% of base, the rate is closer to 5x, and at 300% of base line, it's near 6x. Northern California, PG&E, has a baseline rate of more like 11 cents / kWh, rising to 40 cents/kWh at high usage. In this region, getting solar to displace the expensive portion of electric usage can pay back in 5 years.
2016-04-01 01:01:17
·
answer #4
·
answered by ? 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
When I looked at the price I decided it was not worth it unless electric rates went up about 10 fold or solar panel prices came down 10 fold. Most of the numbers in the answers above are pretty much what I saw.
2007-04-06 12:09:43
·
answer #5
·
answered by campbelp2002 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
I think we can assume that you mean solar ELECTRIC panels? Because if you are talking about hot water panels, that has been decided for many years, and the answer to that one is always YES, its a good idea.
Solar Electric depends on many factors.
Solar power magazine did a write up on this about two years ago. The overall answer was yes, but it depended on the cost of electricity where you live, (at least 8cents per kwh), your insolation (quality/duration of usable sunlight) And whether your power company has true net metering. True net metering means the power company pays you as much per kilowatt as they charge you. In essence, you sell your extra power to them. In this respect, the solar installation is not just saving you money, but making you money. You then calculate it as with any other income-producing investment.
If they do not have true net metering, they might buy your electricity back for half or less the amount they charge you when you need some.
A very large savings can be had in states where they give tax incentives for solar installations. Whole neighboorhoods (zeropower developments) have been made this way, and the additional cost of the solar systems does not add much to the price of the houses. And of course, if you live in Hawaii, where electricity costs upward of 25 cents/kwh, and hooking up can cost several thousand, it can make very good sense indeed.
2007-04-06 10:19:05
·
answer #6
·
answered by cyphercube 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
It depends.
Solar panels for directly heating water.... yes, probably. They should greatly reduce the load on your conventional heating system because the water will already be substantially warmer to start with.
Photovoltaic panels, which turn light into electricity. It depends on how many you have and how much sunshine you get. It might take a number of years to recoup your investment but perhaps money is not the only issue to consider here.
2007-04-06 10:48:53
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Only if you include various tax incentives and selling your excess power back to the power company. Even then it's a close call. Probably not if you include the interest you could have earned on that money in a bank.
Right now solar is for two kinds of people. Those living where it would be even more expensive to run a power line to a remote area. And those who don't mind paying more to help the environment.
The cheapest thing to do is use the big power company instead.
EDIT - I'll accept the numbers below. But if you put that $15000 in the bank it would pay you about 60-70 dollars in interest every month, about enough to pay your electric bill. And you'd still have the $15000. As I said, it's a close call.
2007-04-06 09:47:02
·
answer #8
·
answered by Bob 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
YES< YES< YES<
Cost
An average family needing 2.5 Kilowatt system –
(current electricity bill between $50 and $75 per month)
Cost of Solar electric system incl. Installation: $22,500
LESS: Government Rebate: - $7,000 *
LESS: Tax credit: -$1,163 **
___________________________________
You pay only: $14,337
___________________________________
Solar energy is becoming more price-competitive.
Once installed, there are no recurring costs.
More solar panels can easily be added in the future when your family's needs grow. Solar Energy systems are virtually maintenance free and will last for decades
2007-04-06 09:57:56
·
answer #9
·
answered by string1dm 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
Yes, but the time to payback depends on the amount of usable sunshine you get, and the local cost of retail electric power. Most people end up making their money back over a period ranging from 4-10 years.
2007-04-06 09:51:49
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
1
2017-02-28 03:08:10
·
answer #11
·
answered by Nicky 3
·
0⤊
0⤋