Solar worth investment? - California

Questions on how we spend our money and our time - consumer goods and services, home and vehicle, leisure and recreational activities
Post Reply
Topic Author
socialforums2019
Posts: 459
Joined: Sun Aug 25, 2019 10:12 am

Solar worth investment? - California

Post by socialforums2019 »

We are currently evaluating solar for our house. We've tracked the last year of usage and while it didn't make sense originally, we are starting to see a significant average increase in power consumption as well as rates from PG&E.

Our utility bill is typically ~$300-$350/mo however we strictly follow time-of-use to trying to avoid peak charges as best we can. Furthermore, PG&E continues to increase rates, including a rate hike this month:

Peak: $0.43/kWh -> $0.56/kWh
Partial-Peak: $0.41/kWh -> $0.45/kWh
Off-Peak: $0.24/kWh -> $0.25/kWh

We expect both rates and consumption to increase as we purchase another EV in the future and weather becoming more extreme. It is getting to the point where following the "time of use" is becoming an inconvenience of comfort (e.g. The hottest part of the day is during peak time-of-use).

Few things of concern, both good and bad, in California.

First (negative), proposed changes to NEM and taxing solar systems: https://www.utilitydive.com/news/utilit ... ng/625522/

Second (positive), POC for virtual power plant for battery users: https://www.tesla.com/support/energy/te ... t-pge-2022

With that said, tracking our usage from August 2021 to June 2022, in 2021, we were averaging around 20 kWh a day. In 2022, we are now averaging around 25-30 kWh a day.

I went through the quote process last year and most were sizing a system to produce around 18-20,000 kWh/year. I was thinking about doing 2 batteries and most of these quotes were coming out to around $48-$50K before any tax credits, which will drop from 26% to 22% in 2023.

Based upon the data points above, would it make sense to move forward with solar to try to eliminate the PG&E bill or continue to pay monthly rate.
User avatar
TomatoTomahto
Posts: 17158
Joined: Mon Apr 11, 2011 1:48 pm

Re: Solar worth investment? - California

Post by TomatoTomahto »

In MA rather than CA, but virtual power plant (here it’s called ConnectedSolutions) made a huge difference in the numbers.
I get the FI part but not the RE part of FIRE.
Big Dog
Posts: 4608
Joined: Mon Sep 07, 2015 4:12 pm

Re: Solar worth investment? - California

Post by Big Dog »

for your current bills, yes, solar would be worth it today. But who knows what will happen with NEM 3.0 (and as proposed regulations, we can't speak about it.)
MrNarwhal
Posts: 160
Joined: Sun Dec 19, 2021 8:20 pm

Re: Solar worth investment? - California

Post by MrNarwhal »

socialforums2019 wrote: Fri Jun 24, 2022 8:09 am It is getting to the point where following the "time of use" is becoming an inconvenience of comfort (e.g. The hottest part of the day is during peak time-of-use).
Engineering answer (not necessarily the regulatory/accounting/financial answer):

What would be the expected output from your solar (or solar + battery?) system during peak time-of-use?

At what time of day do you want/need to charge your electric vehicle(s) at home?
chw
Posts: 1316
Joined: Thu May 24, 2012 4:22 pm

Re: Solar worth investment? - California

Post by chw »

At those electric rates I would say go for it. I would think your pay back would be pretty quick- 5-6 years or sooner. I installed a system 3.5 years ago which will break even in about 1 more year with average electric rates of about .24 kWh. I believe systems are a bit cheaper/ more efficient since my install as well. Energy Sage website is an excellent resource to research solar installs, as well as obtain no hassle quotes from local installers. I used them, and had a great experience.
MathWizard
Posts: 6561
Joined: Tue Jul 26, 2011 1:35 pm

Re: Solar worth investment? - California

Post by MathWizard »

With your rates, I would get the cost for pure grid tie, and think about batteries later.

If you are worried about power outages, price out a smaller system which is off grid in addition to your grid tie, and have a small battery system for it. You could use that for charging your car during daylight hours, and have it as a backup power supply through a transfer switch. It won't generate power during the night,but if batteries get you through the night, it would be enough for emergency power. This would not be as nice as a whole house natural gas generator, but if outages are infrequent, it would suffice.

We don't lose power often where I live, but keeping the house warm in the winter and keeping the food cold is really all we need.

You'd likely need A/C in California if your basement isn't cool enough.
lomarica01
Posts: 272
Joined: Sun Jul 05, 2015 10:57 am

Re: Solar worth investment? - California

Post by lomarica01 »

solar without the batteries it is a no brainer, with the batteries it is much less cost effective.

also the net metering 3.0 proposal makes it much less cost effective but it is unclear when 3.0 will go into effect.

I would make a plan to get solar asap before 3.0 goes into effect and you can always add batteries later.

Do you have a reference for another pge increase this month

Peak: $0.43/kWh -> $0.56/kWh
Partial-Peak: $0.41/kWh -> $0.45/kWh
Off-Peak: $0.24/kWh -> $0.25/kWh

hope this helps
Topic Author
socialforums2019
Posts: 459
Joined: Sun Aug 25, 2019 10:12 am

Re: Solar worth investment? - California

Post by socialforums2019 »

TomatoTomahto wrote: Fri Jun 24, 2022 8:23 am In MA rather than CA, but virtual power plant (here it’s called ConnectedSolutions) made a huge difference in the numbers.
In a positive or negative fashion?
Topic Author
socialforums2019
Posts: 459
Joined: Sun Aug 25, 2019 10:12 am

Re: Solar worth investment? - California

Post by socialforums2019 »

Big Dog wrote: Fri Jun 24, 2022 8:42 am for your current bills, yes, solar would be worth it today. But who knows what will happen with NEM 3.0 (and as proposed regulations, we can't speak about it.)
This is my biggest concern. What is being proposed for NEM 3.0 really discourages me from wanting solar as it drastically removes the financial incentives and benefits.
Topic Author
socialforums2019
Posts: 459
Joined: Sun Aug 25, 2019 10:12 am

Re: Solar worth investment? - California

Post by socialforums2019 »

MrNarwhal wrote: Fri Jun 24, 2022 8:47 am
socialforums2019 wrote: Fri Jun 24, 2022 8:09 am It is getting to the point where following the "time of use" is becoming an inconvenience of comfort (e.g. The hottest part of the day is during peak time-of-use).
Engineering answer (not necessarily the regulatory/accounting/financial answer):

What would be the expected output from your solar (or solar + battery?) system during peak time-of-use?

At what time of day do you want/need to charge your electric vehicle(s) at home?
Don’t really know the answer to the first question but we don’t use much power during peak time of use. We coordinate our main consumption (ac/dish washer/laundry) during non peak times but in the summer months, the hottest part of the day is during peak times so we want to run the AC without issue.

Charging the car isn’t an issue. With how infrequent we drive, we can go 3-4 days driving the EV without needing to charge it. Charging for the EV is scheduled at midnight when cheapest energy is.
User avatar
TomatoTomahto
Posts: 17158
Joined: Mon Apr 11, 2011 1:48 pm

Re: Solar worth investment? - California

Post by TomatoTomahto »

socialforums2019 wrote: Sat Jun 25, 2022 11:18 am
TomatoTomahto wrote: Fri Jun 24, 2022 8:23 am In MA rather than CA, but virtual power plant (here it’s called ConnectedSolutions) made a huge difference in the numbers.
In a positive or negative fashion?
Oh sorry, should have said- it’s very positive for us. We admittedly do have a lot of batteries (52kwh), but the ConnectedSolutions should be writing us a check for $5k annually. That is far in excess of what the draw would be from an equivalent net metering credit. I say “should be writing us a check” because it’s our first year in the plan.
I get the FI part but not the RE part of FIRE.
Topic Author
socialforums2019
Posts: 459
Joined: Sun Aug 25, 2019 10:12 am

Re: Solar worth investment? - California

Post by socialforums2019 »

chw wrote: Fri Jun 24, 2022 9:10 am At those electric rates I would say go for it. I would think your pay back would be pretty quick- 5-6 years or sooner. I installed a system 3.5 years ago which will break even in about 1 more year with average electric rates of about .24 kWh. I believe systems are a bit cheaper/ more efficient since my install as well. Energy Sage website is an excellent resource to research solar installs, as well as obtain no hassle quotes from local installers. I used them, and had a great experience.
How long was the process typically? I’m hoping to get it powered on in 2022 to take advantage of the 26% tax credit before it drops to 23% but I’ve heard it takes quite a long time to finally get the go live to turn it on. Don’t know if 4-5 month lead time is enough
WhiteMaxima
Posts: 3339
Joined: Thu May 19, 2016 5:04 pm

Re: Solar worth investment? - California

Post by WhiteMaxima »

For emergency backup, I think it worth it. My are lost power during storm last winter. I use couple of solar panel bought from HD and a backup battery to power my computer and internet, it worked and I didn't lose productivity. Also I install solar panel on my 4Runner roof for outland power backup just in case my car is running out of battery. A 100watt panel cost only $80 now. I will buy 30 of them and do a 12V power supply science project.
mervinj7
Posts: 2496
Joined: Thu Mar 27, 2014 3:10 pm

Re: Solar worth investment? - California

Post by mervinj7 »

socialforums2019 wrote: Fri Jun 24, 2022 8:09 am We are currently evaluating solar for our house. We've tracked the last year of usage and while it didn't make sense originally, we are starting to see a significant average increase in power consumption as well as rates from PG&E.

Our utility bill is typically ~$300-$350/mo however we strictly follow time-of-use to trying to avoid peak charges as best we can. Furthermore, PG&E continues to increase rates, including a rate hike this month:

Peak: $0.43/kWh -> $0.56/kWh
Partial-Peak: $0.41/kWh -> $0.45/kWh
Off-Peak: $0.24/kWh -> $0.25/kWh
Financially, solar with no batteries is a clear winner for your case since it's very similar to mine. See my post for three years of detailed data including real "bills."
If possible, try to include details in your first post regarding system size, expected output as per PVWATTs, pricing, warranty, etc. I agree that you will be far better off under NEM 2.0 then NEM 3.0.
Also 30kWh/day*365 days=11,000 kWh/year. Do you know why they suggested 20,000 kWh/year systems?

viewtopic.php?t=291738
mrmicro
Posts: 20
Joined: Sat Aug 29, 2020 11:58 am

Re: Solar worth investment? - California

Post by mrmicro »

I was in a similar boat (in CA) and have started the process of going solar.
My yearly consumption was around 6000KWh and i am getting a 5.6kw system that would generate me around 8500kWh annually. No batteries since they dont make economic sense currently.
My understanding for NEM3.0 is that it has significant opposition but will still go in. I want my system up and running so i am at least grand fathered in NEM2 for 15 years. When NEM3 goes in, i will put in batteries (assuming battery technology improvements in the next 15 years will make it more cost effective).
Your system size seems excessive. Look at the yearly usage and build approx 25% extra. Then go to energysage to get easy quotes.
lillypie
Posts: 63
Joined: Fri Jul 09, 2010 8:08 pm

Re: Solar worth investment? - California

Post by lillypie »

We just put on Solar in California. We thought our usage was so low that solar wouldn't make sense for us, but as you note the rates have been going through the roof! (Thanks SDGE!) The project took about 3.5 months to complete, and as you note you would want to get it in this year for the 26% break. It is my understanding if you get in on NEM 2.0 you most likely will have some period of grandfathered rules. We installed double our historical usage in anticipation of increased usage, and have since purchased an EV to consume that and further reduce our ROI period. I say go for it.

I should add that this project was driven first by a need to update our old electric panel. We will get the 26% break on that too as it is deemed a necessary part of the solar project. Consider if you have other needs that fall into this category (roof?)

Edit: it took 3.5 months from contract start to turning it on.
Last edited by lillypie on Sat Jun 25, 2022 4:53 pm, edited 1 time in total.
CletusCaddy
Posts: 2678
Joined: Sun Sep 12, 2021 4:23 am

Re: Solar worth investment? - California

Post by CletusCaddy »

socialforums2019 wrote: Fri Jun 24, 2022 8:09 am
Furthermore, PG&E continues to increase rates, including a rate hike this month:

Peak: $0.43/kWh -> $0.56/kWh
Partial-Peak: $0.41/kWh -> $0.45/kWh
Off-Peak: $0.24/kWh -> $0.25/kWh
Part of this is the standard rotation from Winter to Summer rates. It will come back down come Winter.

But yes, even looking YoY, the Summer rates have increased 12% or so
chw
Posts: 1316
Joined: Thu May 24, 2012 4:22 pm

Re: Solar worth investment? - California

Post by chw »

socialforums2019 wrote: Sat Jun 25, 2022 11:30 am
chw wrote: Fri Jun 24, 2022 9:10 am At those electric rates I would say go for it. I would think your pay back would be pretty quick- 5-6 years or sooner. I installed a system 3.5 years ago which will break even in about 1 more year with average electric rates of about .24 kWh. I believe systems are a bit cheaper/ more efficient since my install as well. Energy Sage website is an excellent resource to research solar installs, as well as obtain no hassle quotes from local installers. I used them, and had a great experience.
How long was the process typically? I’m hoping to get it powered on in 2022 to take advantage of the 26% tax credit before it drops to 23% but I’ve heard it takes quite a long time to finally get the go live to turn it on. Don’t know if 4-5 month lead time is enough
About 5 weeks (2018 install) from quote to flipping switch on. We were trying to install at the time to be included in a SREC program that was sunsetting at the end of 2018. That particular installer said he could get it done and he did. Might be a different story now, but with your electric rates, I think the install would still make sense even if delayed to 2023.
Point
Posts: 660
Joined: Mon Jul 10, 2017 9:33 pm

Re: Solar worth investment? - California

Post by Point »

Have you gone through the property and determined what is using the power? Pool pump, electric heat, electric dryer, recirculating water heater pump, /C, non LED lighting, etc? Have you determined what your vampire draw is (those items that are always on - timers, switches, computers, TV's, etc? Address all of these if you haven't and see if you can get your baseline down considerably. Also, consider using a rack to dry clothes if you have the right exposure and heat in your house.

If you don't have ceiling fans, this is also a good step: low draw, good cooling effect compared to cost of running A/C.

From there, consider batteries coupled with your time of use, but you may find the utility has the right to draw > 50% daily from the battery if you receive a utility rebate on their purchase. In other words, the effecrtiveness of the battery for your overall usage could be minimal, but handy in some outages.

Solar can work out well in CA (both of ours has) but you need good exposure year round. Otherwise you will have an excess of panels to get to the desired output, assuming you have enough roof space.
Topic Author
socialforums2019
Posts: 459
Joined: Sun Aug 25, 2019 10:12 am

Re: Solar worth investment? - California

Post by socialforums2019 »

Point wrote: Sat Jun 25, 2022 5:08 pm Have you gone through the property and determined what is using the power? Pool pump, electric heat, electric dryer, recirculating water heater pump, /C, non LED lighting, etc? Have you determined what your vampire draw is (those items that are always on - timers, switches, computers, TV's, etc? Address all of these if you haven't and see if you can get your baseline down considerably. Also, consider using a rack to dry clothes if you have the right exposure and heat in your house.

If you don't have ceiling fans, this is also a good step: low draw, good cooling effect compared to cost of running A/C.

From there, consider batteries coupled with your time of use, but you may find the utility has the right to draw > 50% daily from the battery if you receive a utility rebate on their purchase. In other words, the effecrtiveness of the battery for your overall usage could be minimal, but handy in some outages.

Solar can work out well in CA (both of ours has) but you need good exposure year round. Otherwise you will have an excess of panels to get to the desired output, assuming you have enough roof space.
The home is perfectly situated for solar I think. On the backside of the house, it has a large single plane of roofing which is east facing and not obstructed from any trees. When I first engaged with Tesla, they developed a system which was 12.75 kW with 20 panels on the rear of the house and then they had another 10 panels on the front of the house which is west facing. They estimate 18.2kWh/year.

I like the Tesla product/app/ecosystem but I've heard some horror stories about their customer service. If I go through other companies and use different panels, but use Tesla batteries, does it still all go through the Tesla app or what determines the app? The inverter?
mervinj7
Posts: 2496
Joined: Thu Mar 27, 2014 3:10 pm

Re: Solar worth investment? - California

Post by mervinj7 »

lillypie wrote: Sat Jun 25, 2022 12:38 pm I should add that this project was driven first by a need to update our old electric panel. We will get the 26% break on that too as it is deemed a necessary part of the solar project. Consider if you have other needs that fall into this category (roof?)
I don't know about electrical panels but the IRS has explicitly said roofs are not included in the solar tax credit. Despite the relatively clear language people still try to deduct it.


https://www.irs.gov/newsroom/energy-inc ... nd-answers
Q. Is a roof eligible for the residential energy efficient property tax credit?
A. In general, traditional roofing materials and structural components do not qualify for the credit. However, some solar roofing tiles and solar roofing shingles serve as solar electric collectors while also performing the function of traditional roofing, serving both the functions of solar electric generation and structural support and such items may qualify for the credit. Components such as a roof's decking or rafters that serve only a roofing or structural function do not qualify for the credit.
Dottie57
Posts: 12379
Joined: Thu May 19, 2016 5:43 pm
Location: Earth Northern Hemisphere

Re: Solar worth investment? - California

Post by Dottie57 »

If I owned a house I would like the feeling that I am independent of a utlity so necessary to the way we live.
User avatar
tyrion
Posts: 1423
Joined: Fri Feb 08, 2008 2:33 pm

Re: Solar worth investment? - California

Post by tyrion »

socialforums2019 wrote: Sat Jun 25, 2022 6:47 pm
Point wrote: Sat Jun 25, 2022 5:08 pm Have you gone through the property and determined what is using the power? Pool pump, electric heat, electric dryer, recirculating water heater pump, /C, non LED lighting, etc? Have you determined what your vampire draw is (those items that are always on - timers, switches, computers, TV's, etc? Address all of these if you haven't and see if you can get your baseline down considerably. Also, consider using a rack to dry clothes if you have the right exposure and heat in your house.

If you don't have ceiling fans, this is also a good step: low draw, good cooling effect compared to cost of running A/C.

From there, consider batteries coupled with your time of use, but you may find the utility has the right to draw > 50% daily from the battery if you receive a utility rebate on their purchase. In other words, the effecrtiveness of the battery for your overall usage could be minimal, but handy in some outages.

Solar can work out well in CA (both of ours has) but you need good exposure year round. Otherwise you will have an excess of panels to get to the desired output, assuming you have enough roof space.
The home is perfectly situated for solar I think. On the backside of the house, it has a large single plane of roofing which is east facing and not obstructed from any trees. When I first engaged with Tesla, they developed a system which was 12.75 kW with 20 panels on the rear of the house and then they had another 10 panels on the front of the house which is west facing. They estimate 18.2kWh/year.

I like the Tesla product/app/ecosystem but I've heard some horror stories about their customer service. If I go through other companies and use different panels, but use Tesla batteries, does it still all go through the Tesla app or what determines the app? The inverter?
I put in solar 2 years ago. LG panels with Enphase microinverters and 2 Tesla powerwalls. Yes, the Tesla app is what controls it all. It's been a seamless system so far. I still pay some attention to time of day use but for the most part it's just a 10% penalty (storing to the powerwall and withdrawing energy from it has some waste that is estimated at 10% roundtrip). SDGE territory and our rates are even worse that yours - 69 cents/KWh summer peak. It's nice to not worry too much about the peak rates.

If you can get in prior to NEM 3.0 that would be idea. From what I've read they may shorten the grandfathering to 15 years but that beats going straight to NEM 3.0.
Post Reply